Agenda of Planning and Development Committee

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.2 Development Application DA 307/2013(6) - 3-4/51 Moulder Street

Attachment 1 Modified Notice of Approval

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

Development Application No DA 307/2013(6)

NA18/ Container PR27921

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

(AS MODIFIED)

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 4.18

Development Application
Applicant Name:	Mr SI Munro
Applicant Address:	“Saddleback”, 27 Rocky Ponds Road CUMNOCK NSW 2867
Owner’s Name:	Mr SI Munro and Mrs V McCourt-Munro (Lot 7)
Land to Be Developed:	Approved Lot 4 in the subdivision of Lot 7 DP 286647 – 51 Moulder Street, Orange (formerly known as Lot 201 DP 1175177 and Lot 1 DP 797835 - 49 and 51 Moulder Street, Orange)
Proposed Development:	Dwelling House, Community Title Subdivision (three lot residential), Community Title Subdivision (four lot residential) and Dwelling Houses (four)

Building Code of Australia building classification:	To be determined by PCA

Determination made under Section 4.16
Made On:	2 October 2018
Determination:	CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

Consent to Operate From:	4 December 2013
Consent to Lapse On:	4 December 2018

Terms of Approval

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

(1) To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(2) To provide adequate public health and safety measures.

(3) To ensure a quality urban design for the development which complements the surrounding environment.

(4) To maintain neighbourhood amenity and character.

(5) Because the development will require the provision of, or increase the demand for, public amenities and services.

(6) To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

(7) To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(8) To minimise the impact of development on the environment.

Conditions

(1) The development must be carried out in accordance with:

(a) Plans numbered:

12052 LOT 2 – C – site plan and floor plan Lot 2

12052 – C – site plan entrance

12052 – LOT 2 – C – elevations Lot 2

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 9am June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C shadow 10am June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 11am June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 12pm June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 1pm June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 2pm June 21

12052 – LOT 2 – C – shadow 3pm June 21

12052 – G – existing boundaries and site analysis

12052 – G – proposed site plan overall, staging and calculations

12052 – G – proposed site plan part 1 Lots 3-6

12052 – G – proposed site plan part 1A entrance detail

12052 – G – preliminary engineering plan – stormwater Lots 3-6

12052 – G – preliminary engineering plan – sewer Lots 3-6

12052 – G – proposed landscaping plan – Lots 3-6

12052 – G – proposed floor plan unit 3

12052 – G – proposed elevations unit 3

12052 – G – proposed floor plan unit 4

12052 – G – proposed elevations unit 4

12052 – G – proposed floor plan units 5 & 6

12052 – G – proposed elevations units 5 & 6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 9am June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 10am June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 11am June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 12 noon June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 1pm June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 2pm June 21 units 3-6

12052 – G – shadow diagram 3pm June 21 units 3-6

Amending plans numbered: 12052 Lot 2 Rev A (10 sheets)

Amending plans by Geolyse numbered: 01_A02 Rev A; 01_A03 Rev A dated 7.9.2016 (2 sheets).

Amending plans for Unit 5 by Benedict Design

Project No. P056 dated 30/01/2018

Drawing Nos, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, 3.2 (6 sheets)

Amending plans for Unit 6 by Adaptive Architects

Project No. COR01

Sheet Nos. A02(A), A03(A) (2 sheets)

Amending plans for Unit 4 by McKinnon Design

Job No. 18069 – Dwg Nos. 01-04 (August 2018) (4 sheets)

(b) statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

(2) All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

(3) A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

a. showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

b. showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

c. stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

(4) In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of the Act, evidence that such a contract of insurance is in force is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority before any building work authorised to be carried out by the consent commences.

(5) Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989 must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the following information:

a in the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:

1 the name of the licence number of the principal contractor, and

2 the name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that Act,

b in the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

1 the name of the owner-builder, and

2 if the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder permit under that Act, the number of the owner-builder permit.

If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in progress so that the information under this condition becomes out of date, further work must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the updated information.

(6) Where any excavation work on the site extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, the person having the benefit of the development consent must, at the person’s own expense:

a protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

b where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

Note: This condition does not apply if the person having the benefit of the development consent owns the adjoining land or the owner of the adjoining land has given consent in writing to that condition not applying.

STAGE 1 - DWELLING

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(7) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by, Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out on site.

(8) An amended landscape plan shall be submitted prior to the issue of a construction certificate. The plan shall show the area from the entrance of the site up to the rear boundary of lot 2. The plan shall include a row of Camellia Sasanqua within the landscape bed at the front of the site with mix of ground covers and a range of ground covers adjacent to the driveway on the western side and adjacent to lot 2.

(9) An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act is to be sought from Orange City Council, as the Water and Sewer Authority, for water, sewer and stormwater connection. Details concerning the proposed backflow prevention between the nominated water tank supply and the potable system is to be provided. No plumbing and drainage is to commence until approval is granted.

(10) Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, evidence shall be submitted to Council/accredited certifier of the lodgement of plans with the Department of Lands and Property Information for the subdivision approved under DA 190/2013(1).

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(11) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available on-site.

(12) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(13) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(14) A Registered Surveyor’s certificate identifying the location of the building on the site must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of the slab or footings.

(15) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(16) Storage of materials including stockpiles is not permitted on the public footpath area or roadway unless a hoarding is provided and approval granted.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

(17) Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan required by Condition (8) and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(18) No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

(19) 1.8m high timber paling fencing shall be provided around the northern, western and southern boundary of lot 2 and 1.5m high timber paling fence shall be provided adjacent to the driveway.

(20) Where Orange City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a final inspection of water connection, sewer and stormwater drainage shall be undertaken by Orange City Council and a Final Notice of Inspection issued, prior to the issue of either an interim or a final Occupation Certificate.

(21) Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, evidence shall be submitted to Council/Accredited Certifier of the registration of the subdivision approved under DA 190/2013(1).

(22) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

STAGE 2 - THREE LOT COMMUNITY TITLE SUBDIVISION

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(23) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by, Council/Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to any excavation or construction works being carried out on site.

(24) Engineering plans, showing details of all proposed work and adhering to any engineering conditions of development consent, are to be submitted to, and approved by, Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(25) A water and soil erosion control plan is to be submitted to Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) for approval prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate. The control plan is to be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the Landcom, Managing Urban Stormwater; Soils and Construction Handbook.

(26) The development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater retention within the development, designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of lower frequency (that is, a rarer event) without damage to downstream developments. Where appropriate, the spillway design capacity is to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Dam Safety Committee.

The design of the detention storage is to be undertaken using the ILSAX rainfall-runoff hydrologic model or an approved equivalent capable of assessing runoff volumes and their temporal distribution as well as peak flow rates. The model is to be used to calculate the flow rates for the existing and post-development conditions. The developed flows are to be routed through the proposed storage within the model so that the outflows obtained are no greater than the flows obtained for the pre-existing natural flows. A report detailing the results of the analysis, which includes:

· catchment plan showing sub-catchments under existing and developed conditions;

· schematic diagram of the catchment model showing sub areas and linkages;

· tabulation detailing the elevation, storage volume and discharge relationships; and

· tabulation for the range of frequencies analysed, the inflows, outflows and peak storage levels for both existing and developed conditions;

together with copies of the data files for the model and engineering design plans of the required drainage system are to be submitted and approved by Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issue a Construction Certificate.

(27) Proposed lots are to be provided with interlot stormwater drainage, including those lots abutting public land, where the surface of the entire lot cannot be drained to the kerb and gutter at the lot frontage. A grated stormwater pit is to be constructed within each lot provided with interlot stormwater drainage. Engineering plans for this drainage system are to be approved by Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issuing a Construction Certificate.

(28) A 150mm-diameter sewer main is to be constructed from Council’s existing main to serve proposed lots 2 and 3. Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6), prior to issuing a Construction Certificate, is to approve engineering plans for this sewerage system.

(29) A water reticulation analysis by “Watsys” or other Council-approved equivalent flow-modelling computer program, is to be carried out on any proposed water-reticulation and fire hydrant systems for the development. A professional engineer or other Council-approved person is to carry out the analysis. The analysis is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval with engineering plans prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

The reticulation system is to be designed to supply a peak instantaneous demand by gravity of 0.15 L/s/tenement at a minimum residual head of 200kPa.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(30) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available onsite.

(31) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(32) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(33) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(34) Storage of materials including stockpiles is not permitted on the public footpath area or roadway unless a hoarding is provided and approval granted.

(35) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

(36) The provisions and requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code are to be applied to this application and all work constructed within the development is to be in accordance with that Code.

The developer is to be entirely responsible for the provision of water, sewerage and drainage facilities capable of servicing all the lots from Council’s existing infrastructure. The developer is to be responsible for gaining access over adjoining land for services where necessary and easements are to be created about all water, sewer and drainage mains within and outside the lots they serve.

(37) The common driveway excluding the visitor parking area shall be constructed to the southern boundary of proposed lot 3. The required driveway and parking areas are to be sealed with bitumen, hot mix or concrete and are to be designed for all expected loading conditions (provided however that the minimum pavement depth for gravel and flush seal roadways is 200mm) and be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

The remaining common driveway and visitor parking areas are to be constructed as a component of Stage 3.

(38) Water and sewerage reticulation is to be provided to every lot in the proposed residential subdivision in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(39) Application shall be made for a Subdivision Certificate under Section 109(1)(d) of the Act.

(40) Prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate, a Surveyor’s Certificate or written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority, stating that the buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Lot 2 comply in respect to the distances of walls from boundaries.

(41) Prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate, a written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority stating that the existing sewer connection, stormwater disposal and water supply are all fully contained within the boundaries of the proposed Lot 2.

(42) A Surveyor’s Certificate or written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority, stating that the buildings within the boundaries of proposed Lots 2 comply in respect of the distances of walls from boundaries and the common wall construction prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate.

(43) The payment of $11,650.30 is to be made to Council in accordance with section 94 of the Act and the Orange Development Contributions Plan 2012 (Development in Remainder of LGA) towards the provision of the following public facilities:

Open Space and Recreation	@ $4,520.38 x 1 additional lot	4,520.38
Community and Cultural	@ $771.11 x 1 additional lot	771.11
Roads and Cycleways	@ $5,586.70 x 1 additional lot	5,586.70
Stormwater Drainage	@ $432.78 x 1 additional lot	432.78
Local Area Facilities	--	--
Plan Preparation & Administration	@ $339.33 x 1 additional lot	339.33
TOTAL:		$11,650.30

The contributions will be indexed quarterly in accordance with the Orange Development Contributions Plan 2012 (Development in Remainder of LGA). This Plan can be inspected at the Orange Civic Centre, Byng Street, Orange.

(44) Payment of contributions for water, sewer and drainage works is required to be made at the contribution rate applicable at the time that the payment is made. The contributions are based on 1 ET for water supply headworks and 1 ET for sewerage headworks. A Certificate of Compliance, from Orange City Council in accordance with the Water Management Act 2000, will be issued upon payment of the contributions.

This Certificate of Compliance is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(45) Certification from Telstra, stating that telecommunication systems comply with Australian Standards, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(46) Certification from Country Energy, stating that electricity and street lighting systems comply with Country Energy’s Networks Division Customer Connection Policy NP11.1, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(47) An easement to drain sewage and to provide Council access for maintenance of sewerage works a minimum of 2.0 metres wide is to be created over the proposed sewerage works. The Principal Certifying Authority is to certify that the easement is in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(48) All services are to be contained within the allotment that they serve. A Statement of Compliance, from a Registered Surveyor, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(49) A Certificate of Compliance, from a Qualified Engineer, stating that the stormwater retention basin comply with the approved engineering plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(50) Where stormwater crosses land outside the lot it favours, an easement to drain water is to be created over the works. A Restriction-as-to-User under section 88B of the NSW Conveyancing Act 1979 is to be created on the title of the proposed lots requiring that no structures are to be placed on the site, or landscaping or site works carried out on the site, in a manner that affects the continued operation of the interlot drainage system. The minimum width of the easement is to be as required in the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(51) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

STAGE 3 - FOUR LOT COMMUNITY TITLE SUBDIVISION

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(52) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by, Council/Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to any excavation or construction works being carried out on site.

(53) Engineering plans, showing details of all proposed work and adhering to any engineering conditions of development consent, are to be submitted to, and approved by, Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(54) A water and soil erosion control plan is to be submitted to Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) for approval prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate. The control plan is to be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the Landcom, Managing Urban Stormwater; Soils and Construction Handbook.

(55) The development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater retention within the development, designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of lower frequency (that is, a rarer event) without damage to downstream developments. Where appropriate, the spillway design capacity is to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Dam Safety Committee.

· catchment plan showing sub-catchments under existing and developed conditions;

· schematic diagram of the catchment model showing sub areas and linkages;

· tabulation detailing the elevation, storage volume and discharge relationships; and

· tabulation for the range of frequencies analysed, the inflows, outflows and peak storage levels for both existing and developed conditions;

(56) Proposed lots are to be provided with interlot stormwater drainage, including those lots abutting public land, where the surface of the entire lot cannot be drained to the kerb and gutter at the lot frontage. A grated stormwater pit is to be constructed within each lot provided with interlot stormwater drainage. Engineering plans for this drainage system are to be approved by Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issuing a Construction Certificate.

(57) A 150mm-diameter sewer main is to be constructed from Council’s existing main to serve the proposed lots. Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6), prior to issuing a Construction Certificate, is to approve engineering plans for this sewerage system.

(58) A water reticulation analysis by “Watsys” or other Council-approved equivalent flow-modelling computer program, is to be carried out on any proposed water-reticulation and fire hydrant systems for the development. A professional engineer or other Council-approved person is to carry out the analysis. The analysis is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval with engineering plans prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

The reticulation system is to be designed to supply a peak instantaneous demand by gravity of 0.15 L/s/tenement at a minimum residual head of 200kPa.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(59) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available onsite.

(60) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(61) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(62) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(63) Storage of materials including stockpiles is not permitted on the public footpath area or roadway unless a hoarding is provided and approval granted.

(64) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

(65) The provisions and requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code are to be applied to this application and all work constructed within the development is to be in accordance with that Code.

(66) All driveway and parking areas are to be sealed with bitumen, hot mix or concrete and are to be designed for all expected loading conditions (provided however that the minimum pavement depth for gravel and flush seal roadways is 200mm) and be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(67) Water and sewerage reticulation is to be provided to every lot in the proposed residential subdivision in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(68) Application shall be made for a Subdivision Certificate under Section 109(1)(d) of the Act.

(69) Prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate, a written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority stating that the existing sewer connection, stormwater disposal and water supply are all fully contained within the boundaries of the proposed Lots 3-6.

(70) The payment of $34,950.90 is to be made to Council in accordance with section 94 of the Act and the Orange Development Contributions Plan 2012 (Development in Remainder of LGA) towards the provision of the following public facilities:

Open Space and Recreation	@ $4,520.38 x 3 additional lots	13,561.14
Community and Cultural	@ $771.11 x 3 additional lots	2,313.33
Roads and Cycleways	@ $5,586.70 x 3 additional lots	16,760.10
Stormwater Drainage	@ $432.78 x 3 additional lots	1,298.34
Local Area Facilities	--	--
Plan Preparation & Administration	@ $339.33 x 3 additional lots	1,017.99
TOTAL:		$34,950.90

(71) Payment of contributions for water, sewer and drainage works is required to be made at the contribution rate applicable at the time that the payment is made. The contributions are based on 3 ETs for water supply headworks and 3 ETs for sewerage headworks. A Certificate of Compliance, from Orange City Council in accordance with the Water Management Act 2000, will be issued upon payment of the contributions.

This Certificate of Compliance is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(72) Evidence from a registered NATA laboratory is to be submitted prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate stating that any filling of allotments has been carried out in accordance with Australian Standard 3798-1990.

(73) Certification from Telstra, stating that telecommunication systems comply with Australian Standards, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(74) Certification from Country Energy, stating that electricity and street lighting systems comply with Country Energy’s Networks Division Customer Connection Policy NP11.1, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(75) An easement to drain sewage and to provide Council access for maintenance of sewerage works a minimum of 2.0 metres wide is to be created over the proposed sewerage works. The Principal Certifying Authority is to certify that the easement is in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(76) All services are to be contained within the allotment that they serve. A Statement of Compliance, from a Registered Surveyor, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(77) A Certificate of Compliance, from a Qualified Engineer, stating that the stormwater retention basin comply with the approved engineering plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(78) Where stormwater crosses land outside the lot it favours, an easement to drain water is to be created over the works. A Restriction-as-to-User under section 88B of the NSW Conveyancing Act 1979 is to be created on the title of the proposed lots requiring that no structures are to be placed on the site, or landscaping or site works carried out on the site, in a manner that affects the continued operation of the interlot drainage system. The minimum width of the easement is to be as required in the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(79) All engineering conditions of development consent as required by the approved engineering plans as it relates to the servicing of the individual lots are to be completed prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(80) Where staged release of the subdivision is proposed, all conditions of consent and contributions relative to the proposed staging of the development shall be complied with prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(81) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

STAGE 4 - FOUR DWELLINGS

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(82) A Construction Certificate application for each dwelling is required to be submitted to, and issued by, Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out on site.

(83) An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act is to be sought from Orange City Council, as the Water and Sewer Authority, for water, sewer and stormwater connection. Details concerning the proposed backflow prevention between the nominated water tank supply and the potable system is to be provided. No plumbing and drainage is to commence until approval is granted.

(84) Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate for each dwelling, evidence shall be submitted to Council/accredited certifier of the lodgement of plans with the Department of Lands and Property for the respective lot under community title subdivision creating Lots 3-6.

(85) Prior to the issue of a construction certificate for any dwelling evidence shall be provided to demonstrate that the lot contains water, sewer and stormwater services in accordance with the approved engineering plans and is serviced by the common driveway.

(86) The dining room opening in the eastern façade of Dwelling 5 shall comprise a frosted window with minimum sill height of 1.6m above finished floor level. The opening shall be detailed in the Construction Certificate plans.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(87) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available on-site.

(88) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(89) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(90) A Registered Surveyor’s certificate identifying the location of the building on the site must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of the slab or footings.

(91) All materials on site or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(92) Storage of materials including stockpiles is not permitted on the public footpath area or roadway unless a hoarding is provided and approval granted.

(93) Pruning of Acer negundo (Box Elder) located in the north western corner of 59A Moulder Street may be undertaken to remove branches encroaching within or over the building footprint for dwelling 3. If any pruning is undertaken such Pruning work shall be undertaken in consultation with the owner of property 59A Moulder Street and be approved by Council’s Manager City Presentation. All pruning shall be undertaken by a qualified arborist in accordance with the requirements of AS 4373 - 2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees. The pruning of trees over property boundaries may be permitted under other legislation.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

(94) Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(95) A total of 12 off-street car parking spaces shall be provided upon the site in accordance with the approved plans, the provisions of Development Control Plan 2004, and be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Council's Development and Subdivision Code prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

(96) A 1.8m high timber paling fence shall be provided around the perimeter of the development, excluding the frontage. A 1.8m timber paling fence shall be provided between each unit. The height of the fence must be measured from the highest finished ground level adjacent to each part of that fence.

(97) Where any existing fencing at the perimeter of the site is to be retained, any additional fencing must be in similar materials and colours, or complementary colours, to the existing fencing, and shall be erected prior to the issuing of the Occupation Certificate, to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Development Assessments.

(98) No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

(99) Where Orange City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a final inspection of water connection, sewer and stormwater drainage shall be undertaken by Orange City Council and a compliance certificate issued, prior to the issue of either an interim or a final Occupation Certificate.

(100) Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, evidence shall be submitted to Council/accredited certifier of the lodgement of plans with the Department of Lands and Property for the respective lot under community title subdivision creating Lots 3-6.

(101) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

(102) Prior to issue of an occupation certificate for Dwelling 5, the applicant shall erect lattice screening on the internal fence between Dwellings 5 and 6 from a point that is 6m to the east of the western boundary for a distance of 8m.

(103) Landscaping for each dwelling shall be established in accordance with the stamped approved plans with the exception of the proposed pittosporums along the northern boundary of lots 3, 4 and 6 and the southern boundary of Lot 4.

(103a) Additional pittosporum plantings (3-4m mature height and 500mm hedged mature width) shall be provided to the eastern boundary of proposed Lot 5, between the northern boundary of Lot 5 and the southern end of the dining room window.

(103b) Additional pittosporum plantings (3-4m mature height and 500mm hedged mature width) shall be provided to the eastern boundary of proposed Lot 6, between the northern boundary of Lot 6 and the northern side of the deck.

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

(104) The applicant shall enter into a run-cost agreement for the collection of waste for each dwelling within the development with Council waste contractor. The agreement with Council’s waste contractor shall occur in perpetuity.

Other Approvals

(1) Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under Section 68.

Nil

(2) General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

Nil

Right of Appeal

If you are dissatisfied with this decision, Section 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gives you the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court. Pursuant to Section 8.10, an applicant may only appeal within 6 months after the date the decision is notified.

*Disability Discrimination* Act 1992:	This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation. The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.

*Disclaimer - S88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919* - Restrictions on the Use of Land:**	The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.

Signed:	On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL
Signature:
Name:	PAUL JOHNSTON – MANAGER DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENTS
Date:	3 October 2018

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.3 Development Application DA 362/2017(1) - Lot 701 Lords Place (Wade Park)

RECORD NUMBER: 2017/2520

AUTHOR: Kelly Walker, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	27 September2017
Applicant/s	Orange City Council
Owner/s	Orange City Council
Land description	Lot 701 DP 1001618 – Wade Park, Lords Place, Orange
Proposed land use	Recreation Facility (indoor) in Association with the Existing Recreation Facility (major) and Demolition
Value of proposed development	$2,200,000

Council's consent is sought for the construction of a new indoor Cricket Centre at Lot 701 DP 1001618 known as Wade Park, Lords Place, Orange (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 - locality plan

The proposal involves the demolition of the existing greyhound pavilion and three (3) trees and the construction of a new indoor Cricket Centre on the western side of the site fronting Lords Place (see Figure 2). The proposed Cricket Centre measures 27.13m by 44.8m, and between 3m and 8.4m in height, and contains graphics of regional cricketers on the western/Lords Place elevation. It is proposed to formalise the access off Lords Place and create an informal parking area adjacent to the Centre, as well as a new driveway and gates. It is also proposed to plant four new trees on the site and within the street.

Figure 2 - proposed site plan (submitted Clarke Keller drawing DA01)

The Cricket Centre will provide a high-performance cricket area with training lanes for junior and senior cricketers and monitors for video playback to assist training. The centre will also include reception, amenities, office space for administrators, canteen, storage and a multi-purpose community room for classes, meetings, VIP lounge etc. Proposed operating hours will be 7am to 10pm Mondays to Saturdays, and 8am to 9pm on Sundays. The peak period for the Centre will be late afternoons and on the weekends.

The existing grandstand will be retained. The sketched grandstand extension will incorporate tiered seating adjacent to the Centre, however is only conceptual at this stage and does not form part of this application. Likewise, building signage is only indicative at this stage, and will be assessed under a separate development application.

The original proposal involved the removal of seven (7) trees, and construction of a larger multi-purpose Centre, including multi-purpose courts and a sports stand to provide additional grandstand seating for the main oval. Following an initial exhibition period and assessment by Council officers and Council’s Urban Design and Heritage Advisor, concerns were raised in relation to adverse heritage and the streetscape impacts, visual impacts, traffic and parking impacts, inconsistencies with the current Masterplan for Wade Park, and potential noise impacts. These concerns were feedback to the applicant, who sought to suspend the assessment of the application pending a design review.

Council received an amended application on 10 August 2018 attempting to address the above issues. The amendment reduces the overall footprint of the building (which results in deletion of two multi-purpose courts), increases the setback from Lords Place, reduces the building height and retains the significant trees (removing three trees instead of seven). Graphics of cricketers on the western/Lords Place elevation have been added to the amended application. No grandstand seating is proposed in the amended application. Following the re-exhibition and re-notification of the amended application two submissions were received. Following the exhibition period 4 late submissions were received. These submissions are discussed in detail later in this report.

Heritage, parking, traffic and noise are the key considerations for this application, and as set out in the main body of this report, adverse impacts are unlikely subject to conditions of consent providing for minor amendments to the design of the building and landscaping, and the provision of additional information for further assessment.

As set out in Council’s Declaration of Planning and Development Assessment Procedures and Protocols (May 2010) the proposal involves a development application by Council, and the estimated value of the development exceeds $1.5 million, therefore the determination of this application falls within the delegation of the Planning and Development Committee.

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council and complies with the relevant aims, objectives and provisions of Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (the ‘LEP’), and Council’s Development Control Plan 2004 (the ‘DCP’) and Infill Guidelines. An Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the ‘EP&A Act’) Section 4.15 assessment indicates that the proposal is acceptable in this instance.

It is therefore recommended that Council supports the application subject to conditions of consent to ensure that the development proceeds in an acceptable manner. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval outlining these conditions.

RECENT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

On 1 March 2018 the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 was substantially amended. The most immediate change involves the restructuring and renumbering of the Act, with other more substantive changes to be phased in over time. However, for some applications (particularly where an application was lodged prior to the changes coming into effect) the supporting documentation may still reference the previous numbering regime. In the drafting of this report the content and substance of the supporting material has been considered irrespective of which legislative references were used.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 (the ‘LEP’) and Orange Development Control Plan 2004 (the ‘DCP’). In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.

Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 – The provisions of the LEP must be considered by the Council in determining the application. LEPs govern the types of development that are permissible or prohibited in different parts of the City and also provide some assessment criteria in specific circumstances. Uses are either permissible or not. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are also to be considered and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP provides guidelines for development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature. For each planning element there are often guidelines used. These guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes. It is thus recognised that there may also be other solutions of merit. All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. The DCP enables developers and architects to use design to achieve the planning outcomes in alternative ways.

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The application is more modest than that originally proposed and is considered to fit well into the Wade Park precinct, itself a heritage item. Nearby residents have concerns over parking, but the impact of this facility is not expected to occur at the same time as major events, so the parking impacts around Lords Place/Moulder Street are expected to be insignificant.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 362/2017(1) for Recreation Facility (indoor) in Association with the Existing Recreation Facility (major) and Demolition at Lot 701 DP 1001618 – Wade Park, Lords Place, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE APPLICATION

Council's consent is sought for the construction of a new indoor Cricket Centre at Lot 701 DP 1001618, known as Wade Park, Lords Place, Orange. The Cricket Centre is to be used in conjunction with the existing Wade Park sports ground and associated buildings. Demolition of the existing greyhound pavilion and three (3) trees are required to facilitate the development.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the demolition of the existing greyhound pavilion and three (3) trees, and the construction of a new indoor Cricket Centre on the western side of the site fronting Lords Place (see Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 3 - proposed Cricket Centre artist’s impression (submitted Clarke Keller drawing DA00)

The proposed Cricket Centre measures 27.13m by 44.8m, running parallel to Lords Place, set back some 18.7m from the western/Lords Place boundary, and measuring between 3m and 8.4m in height (see Figures 3 and 4). It is proposed to install graphics of regional cricketers on the western/Lords Place elevation. It is also proposed to formalise the access off Lords Place and create an informal parking area adjacent to the Centre, as well as a new driveway, driveway crossover and new gates. The main entry to the building is proposed at the end of this driveway. It is proposed to plant four new trees to the west and south of the Centre, along with two new street trees on Lords Place, and scrub and groundcover plantings to the north of the Centre.

Figure 4 - proposed Cricket Centre (submitted Clarke Keller drawing DA02)

Proposed materials include Colorbond sheet cladding, cement sheet cladding, polycarbonate vision panels, blockwork, external louvres and Colorbond roofing. Colours include pale greys and blue-greys (see Figure 3). Graphics are proposed along the western/Lords Place elevation, which will depict significant cricketers from the region, and as an interpretation of the cultural significance of the site (see Figure 5).

Figure 5 - proposed graphics on western/Lords Place elevation

The Cricket Centre will provide a high-performance cricket area with training lanes for junior and senior cricketers, and monitors for video playback to assist training. The centre will also include reception, change rooms, male and female toilets, disabled amenities, office space for administrators, canteen servery and kitchen, storage, and a community room for multi-purposes such as classes, meetings, VIP lounge etc. Proposed operating hours will be 7am to 10pm Mondays to Saturdays, and 8am to 9pm Sundays. The peak period for the Centre will be late afternoons and on the weekends.

The existing grandstand will be retained. The sketched grandstand extension will incorporate tiered seating adjacent to the Centre, however is only conceptual at this stage and does not form part of this application. Likewise, the building signage is only indicative at this stage. Future applications will be submitted in regards to those aspects.

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE

The original proposal involved the demolition of the greyhound pavilion, removal of seven (7) trees, and construction of a new indoor multi-purpose Centre including performance cricket area and nets, multi-purpose courts, change rooms, amenities, kiosk/canteen, office and store rooms, and a sports stand providing additional grandstand seating for the main oval.

Following an initial exhibition period, five (5) submissions were received raising concerns in regards to heritage, visual, parking and noise impacts. These submissions are discussed in detail later in this report. Council officers and Council’s Urban Design and Heritage Advisor also had concerns, including:

- angled orientation of the proposed building to Lords Place, proposed materials and colours, and removal of significant trees from the site having adverse heritage, streetscape, and visual impacts;

- car parking and traffic;

- operational concerns;

- inconsistencies of the proposal with the current Masterplan for Wade Park; and

- potential noise impacts.

These concerns were feedback to the applicant, who sought to suspend the assessment of the application pending a design review.

Design advice was sought from Council’s Heritage Planner and Urban Design and Heritage Advisor, and Council received an amended application on 10 August 2018 attempting to address the above issues. The amendment reduces the overall footprint of the building (which results in the deletion of two multi-purpose courts), increases the setback from Lords Place, reduces the building height and retains significant trees (now only removing three trees instead of seven). Graphics of cricketers on the western/Lords Place elevation have been added to the amended application. No grandstand seating is proposed in the amended application. Following a second exhibition period two (2) submissions were received. These submissions are discussed in detail later in this report.

As set out in Council’s Declaration of Planning and Development Assessment Procedures and Protocols (May 2010) the proposal involves a development application by Council and the estimated value of the development exceeds $1.5 million, therefore the determination of this application falls within the delegation of the Planning and Development Committee.

SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

Wade Park is Orange’s major sporting venue. It is bounded by four streets - Moulder, Warrendine and Peisley Streets, and Lords Place. Wade Park is a relatively flat, open site which comprises predominately turf and exotic trees including pin oaks, elms, plane trees, liquid ambers and poplars (see Figure 6).

Figure 6 - Wade Park during a National League trial (from submitted Statement of Environmental Effects, by Ian Rufus of “Hillcrest”, dated August 2018)

In 1862 the Council applied to the Government for the land to be used as a cricket pitch and it was set aside for a reserve in the original village plan of 1846. Wade Park’s namesake is Sir Charles Gregory Wade, former Judge of the Supreme Court, Attorney General, and Member of the Legislative Assembly and Minister for Justice. It was first dedicated as a sportsground for cricket and for use as a showground between 1887 and 1908.

Wade Park was officially opened in 1910 during the Jubilee celebrations, and improvements have been made over time. In 1925 a new cricket ground and football oval were established. Greyhound racing at Wade Park began in the 1930s along with a racing track. Significant facilities did not arrive until much later; including the 1977 grandstand, the spectator mounds, electronic scoreboard and judging box; lights in the 1980s; and further minor works in the 1990s.

The site currently includes:

- sports oval;

- 1,000 seat grandstand with canteen and dressing rooms on the lower level (west side of oval);

- former TAB building adjacent to the grandstand;

- storage sheds to the rear of the grandstand;

- entry gates and ticket office at front gate (Moulder Street);

- brick equipment shed;

- open metal seating (east side of oval);

- cricket pitch;

- tennis courts and tennis complex (south of oval on Lot 702);

- greyhound structure (currently used for storage);

- caretaker’s cottages on Moulder Street (see Figure 7), which were built around 1880 in Victorian Gothic style (one of the cottages retains its use); and

- mature trees and landscaping; including a mature avenue of mainly elm trees with a dense hedge below along the eastern boundary, acting as a green screen for Peisley Street; and a mature avenue of Eucalyptus sp. along the eastern side of Lords Place, providing good shade coverage, and along with plane trees on the western side of the street give a strong avenue effect along Lords Place.

Figure 7 – caretaker’s cottage (looking northeast from Wade Park)

To the west and south of Wade Park are mostly residential properties on typical sized lots, as well as a school, parks, open spaces and other recreational areas. The properties to the north are mostly commercial at the edge of the central business area, although these were originally built as residential dwellings. To the east of the site are the railway line and station, as well as some industrial and commercial uses.

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 1.7 - Application of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994

Section 1.7 of the EP&A Act 1979 identifies that Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 have effect in connection with terrestrial and aquatic environments.

Notwithstanding, Section 28 of the Biodiversity Conservation (Savings and Transitional) Regulation 2017 states that the former planning provisions continue to apply to the determination of a pending planning application, being an application for planning approval made before the commencement of the new Act but not determined before that commencement. The relevant provisions are set out at Part 5A of the historical version of the EP&A Act dated 24 August 2017.

Having regard to the relevant provisions and based on an inspection of the subject property, it is considered that the proposed development is not likely to have a significant effect on any threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats.

Section 4.15

Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s4.15(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a) to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(b) to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs by implementing the principles for ecologically sustainable development,

(f) to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be consistent with these aims, as set out throughout this report.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.7 - Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned RE2 Private Recreation
Lot Size Map:	No Minimum Lot Size
Heritage Map:	Listed heritage item but not within heritage conservation area
Height of Buildings Map:	Building height limit 18m
Floor Space Ratio Map:	Maximum floor space limit 0.2:1
Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:	No biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater vulnerable
Drinking Water Catchment Map:	Not within the drinking water catchment
Watercourse Map:	Not within or affecting a defined watercourse
Urban Release Area Map:	Not within an urban release area
Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

· covenants imposed or required by Council

· prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

· any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

· any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

· any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

· any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

· any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones and

The subject site is located within the RE2 Private Recreation zone. The proposed development is defined as ‘recreation facility (indoor)’ under LEP 2011. The existing use of Wade Park is ‘recreation facility (major)’. The LEP Dictionary defines these uses as follows:

recreation facility (indoor) means a building or place used predominantly for indoor recreation, whether or not operated for the purposes of gain, including a squash court, indoor swimming pool, gymnasium, table tennis centre, health studio, bowling alley, ice rink or any other building or place of a like character used for indoor recreation, but does not include an entertainment facility, a recreation facility (major) or a registered club.

recreation facility (major) means a building or place used for large-scale sporting or recreation activities that are attended by large numbers of people whether regularly or periodically, and includes theme parks, sports stadiums, showgrounds, racecourses and motor racing tracks.

Recreational facilities are permitted with consent in the RE2 zone. This application is seeking consent. Demolition is discussed in more detail in LEP Clause 2.7 below.

Clause 2.3 - Zone Objectives and Land Use Table

Clause 2.3 of LEP 2011 references the Land Use Table and Objectives for each zone in LEP 2011. The objectives for land zoned RE2 Private Recreation are as follows:

· To enable land to be used for private open space or recreational purposes.

· To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

· To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

· To ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement.

· To ensure development along the Southern Link Road has alternative access.

The proposed Cricket Centre is consistent with the above objectives for the zone as follows:

· Wade Park will continue to be used for recreational purposes;

· the proposed development is compatible with, and will enhance the existing use of the land by providing for year round, all weather, cricket practise and games, and will fulfil the needs of the growing community;

· the proposal will improve the facilities and amenities at the facility, which are in need of upgrading;

· the proposal protects and enhances the natural recreational environment, where trees to be removed are not considered significant and will be replaced with more appropriate species;

· Wade Park is in easy walking and cycling distance to residential dwellings, schools, other open space and recreational areas, and the central business area, and has good access to public transport; and

· the proposal will not impact on the Southern Link Road.

Clause 2.7 - Demolition Requires Development Consent

This clause triggers the need for development consent in relation to a building or work. The proposal involves demolition of existing buildings which no longer serve the needs of the site, including the greyhound pavilion, shed, former TAB building, racing tower, corporate box and storage shed, all to the southwest of the main grandstand. Three (3) trees also need to be removed to facilitate the development. The applicant is seeking the consent of Council for these works.

It is considered that the demolition works proposed will have no significant impact on adjoining lands, streetscape or public realm, subject to conditions of consent in respect to hours of operation, dust suppression, and the need to investigate for and appropriately manage the presence of any materials containing asbestos. Given the long history of using the site for recreation, relics are not likely to be found, however a condition of consent is recommended to manage any finds. This matter is discussed in greater detail under LEP Clauses 5.10 and 7.1 later in this report. Heritage and visual impacts of demolition and tree removal are discussed in the LEP Clause 5.10 and DCP assessments later in this report.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

Clause 4.3 - Height of Buildings

This clause limits the height of buildings (HoB) on land identified on the Height of Buildings Map. The subject land is identified on the Map as having two height limits, where the main recreational fields and grandstand area of Wade Park has a height limit of 18m (see Figure 8).

Figure 8 - LEP height of buildings map (Key: P=18m, E=6m, M=12m, J=9m)

The maximum height of the proposed development is 8.4m and is therefore consistent with the height limits set out by the DCP.

Clause 4.4 - Floor Space Ratio

This clause limits the floor space ratio (FSR) permitted on land identified on the Floor Space Ratio Map. The subject land is identified on the Map as having an FSR of 0.2:1.

Clause 4.5 is associated with this clause and establishes the rules for calculating the site area and FSR of any proposal. These rules exclude certain parts of a site and development such as excluding community land and most public places. Pursuant to the Local Government Act 1993 and Crown Land Management Act 2016 Wade Park is not classified as public, community or operational land, and as such no part of the site is to be excluded from the FSR calculations.

The site area (of Lot 710) has been calculated under clause 4.5 as 40,462.5m², meaning the site may have up to 8,092.5m² of floor space. The proposal has a gross floor area of 1,293.28m² and the existing buildings on the site (once the buildings to be demolished have been removed) is approximately 1,360m², giving a total floor space area of 2,653.28m², which is consistent with the FSR requirements.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

5.10 - Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10(1) sets out objectives as follows:

(a) to conserve the environmental heritage of Orange,

(b) to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

(c) to conserve archaeological sites,

(d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

Clauses 5.10(4), 5.10(5) and 5.10(6) state:

(4) Effect of Proposed Development on Heritage Significance

The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause in respect of a heritage item or heritage conservation area, consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned. This subclause applies regardless of whether a heritage management document is prepared under subclause (5) or a heritage conservation management plan is submitted under subclause (6).

(5) Heritage Assessment

The consent authority may, before granting consent to any development:

(a) on land on which a heritage item is located, or

(b) on land that is within a heritage conservation area, or

(c) on land that is within the vicinity of land referred to in paragraph (a) or (b),

require a heritage management document to be prepared that assesses the extent to which the carrying out of the proposed development would affect the heritage significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area concerned.

(6) Heritage Conservation Management Plans

The consent authority may require, after considering the heritage significance of a heritage item and the extent of change proposed to it, the submission of a heritage conservation management plan before granting consent under this clause.

Heritage Significance

Lot 701 of Wade Park is a listed heritage item in the LEP (Item I77), and is surrounded by other listed buildings and nearby to heritage conservation areas (see Figure 9). The application involves demolition, removal of trees and the erection of a building on land on which a heritage item is located. As such Clause 5.10 applies. An assessment against this clause is carried out below.

Figure 9 - LEP heritage map (Key: beige= listed items and red hashing=heritage conservation areas)

Council’s heritage inventory states that ‘Wade Park’ is important as the first dedicated sports ground utilised for cricket and for use as a showground between 1887 and 1908. The listing states that the two cottages fronting Moulder Street, together with mature cultural planting (elms and planes) and the gates, are evidence of Wade Park as an early recreation area dating from the 1850s, and the Gothic character and integrity complement the streetscape and contribute to the Conservation Area as heritage items worthy of improved conservation. The larger cottage to the west relates to the caretaking functions of the Park, while the layout and general appearance of the smaller building would appear to indicate that it was a public toilet.

The heritage listing notes that Wade Park is significant for historical, associative, aesthetic and rarity reasons, including being the first dedicated sports ground utilised for cricket and for use as show ground between 1887 and 1908; associations with the Cricket, Greyhound and Show Society organisations; and the site retains the park-like setting and the structures reflect the various sporting uses and the ad hoc nature of sporting organisation, including civic structures such as the gates, caretaker's cottage and amenity buildings. The site is valued by the local community for the recreational uses and general amenity.

Council’s heritage inventory make the following Statements of Significance about the surrounding listed heritage items:

· Cottage group to the west on Lords Place (numbers 121 to 131 Lords Place) - These six brick cottages retain their original character and form a substantial and consistent group of dwellings, complementing the streetscape and contributing to Orange as heritage items. The group is significant for aesthetic reasons, as well as its rarity within Orange.

· ‘Kelly’s Rugby Hotel’ at 133 Lords Place (corner Moulder Street) - A prominent two storey hotel, the building retains the original bulk and character, complements the streetscape on this prominent corner and contributes to Orange as a heritage item. The hotel was established as the ‘Carriers Arms Hotel’ and the name was changed to the ‘Rugby Hotel’ in 1898. The present building was erected in the 1890s after the pub had burnt down. The Hotel is valued by the local community as a meeting place, and is likely to have historical significance associated with the proximity of Wade Park and sporting events.

· Orange Railway Precinct on Peisley Street – The Precinct is of state significance for its historic, aesthetic and rarity values. The site is very significant as a major railway complex comprising several rare, representative and significant railway buildings and structures developed for Orange, marking the extension of the railway to Orange and completion in 1877. These include the goods shed (1877), Station Master’s residence (1885), Railway Institute building (c1921), administration building (c1950), signal box (1938) and the transhipment shed (c1959). The 1877 two-storey Victorian station building is a fine and rare combined residence/station building, one of only four similar buildings in the state. The cast iron footbridge is a rare surviving structure reflecting a style of construction once similar to other pedestrian bridges and related structures built during the Whitton era in the late nineteenth century. The coming of the railway to Orange was a significant date and event, and the buildings associated with the grand infrastructure remain to dominate the railway precinct. In addition to the historic and social values, the Station group complements the streetscape and contributes to the main Orange Conservation Area as heritage items.

· Dwelling to south at 116 Warrendine Street - The symmetrical inter-war brick residence includes unusual multi-coloured brickwork and retains the original character, including the verandah with central porch, complements the streetscape, and contributes to the Conservation Area.

· Stores (former 1908 Dalton's Flour Mill) to the east at 84-86 Peisley Street - The large gable ended brick warehouse is a landmark within the streetscape and indicates the importance of the railway for freight, and the location of large industries such as the former Flour Mill on this site, while contributing to the Conservation Area as a heritage item. The Mill ceased production in 1956 and most of it was torn down in 1965, however a section still remains. The buildings mark the importance of the railway for goods traffic, but primarily they are the only remnants of one of the largest Flour Mills in the Colony in the 1860s onwards. Minor elements of the machinery remain such as a large flywheel and belt axle within the ceiling space. The building type is rare within regional NSW. Figure 10 below shows a photograph taken during the Coronation Sports Day at Wade Park where the flour mill can be seen in the background, with the (remnant) stores to its left.

Figure 10 - Coronation Sports Day at Wade Park (date unknown c1910) (from submitted Heritage Impact Statement, by Ian Rufus of “Hillcrest”, dated August 2018)

Heritage Assessment

Wade Park is considered to be within a significant heritage setting. The overall site includes buildings, traditional grandstand and a sports oval, and heritage significant portions of the site include the entry gates, caretaker’s cottages and the mature trees, which have been well maintained. The mature trees form a curtilage to the large site, where it retains its park‑like quality and cultural plantings.

The general layout of the property has changed throughout the years to suit the needs of the community, however some of the buildings are unused and underutilised. It is proposed to demolish these buildings, including the greyhound pavilion and shed, former TAB building, racing tower, corporate box and storage shed, all to the southwest of the main grandstand.

The original design was referred to Council’s Urban Design and Heritage Advisor, who had concerns about the angled orientation of the proposed building to Lords Place, proposed materials and colours and removal of significant trees from the site having adverse heritage, streetscape and visual impacts. Following discussions with the applicant, an amended application was prepared and forwarded to Council’s Urban Design and Heritage Advisor for further comments, which are summarised below:

· Character - the proposal utilises traditional shed-type forms which are common in industrial and larger scale structures. The existing character is established by the outer setting of traditional housing and the main grandstand at the ground. A key question in regards to character is what elements of the proposal respond to these elements? The existing structure is largely without architectural merit and no major design features exist on the grandstand other than pragmatic elements related to the engineering design. The general low profile character and pragmatic response within the profile is therefore consistent and the detailed considerations evident in the submitted drawings, and are welcomed as appropriate.

· Landscape – this is an important aspect of ensuring the design fits into the site and context. The submitted landscaping drawing is generally inadequate in this regard. It is recommended that a skilled local Landscape Architect prepare an appropriate planting and finishes proposal for the site and context towards Lords Place. At the least, additional trees are required to the street frontage, to the north side of the new elevation and grasses and groundcovers to the building and carpark perimeter and pathways.

· Scale - the grandstand provides a dominant scale for the site, and the proposed approach with skillion elements is considered appropriate.

· Bulk - the higher part of the building is set towards Lords Place and the lower element fronts the grounds/oval. An option could have included the roof of the taller form sloping up from the lower Lords Place towards the ground. This would have placed the highlight element on the east elevation instead of the west. The proposal chose to utilise the low height of the toilet areas to determine the main form. In view of the proximity and this relationship, the following forms of mitigation are warranted and recommended if the proposal remains in the current from:

- A form of grove planting between the building and the Lords Place frontage sufficient to provide an upper canopy in the 4-8m height zone;

- A ground level planting of ground covers and native grasses to retain the open ground plane while producing a level of screening improvement to the setting, extending from the Tennis Court alignment to the northern alignment of the grandstand;

- Vertical elements such as 200mm blades at 6300mm centres within the polycarbonate sunscreen to add extra scale to this extended element;

- The use of interpretive photographics on the west elevation is not supported given that this form of decoration is unsustainable, and draws attention to the bulk of the building. These may be appropriate internally, or alternatively it is recommended that the interpretive element is included in the grove planting/landscaping; and

- The vertical cladding to the larger form and smaller form to be varied to provide a Windspray colour to the 01 element, and Shale Grey as proposed to the 02 element. This variation will reduce the apparent visual bulk.

· Materials - are well chosen and appropriate for the context and setting.

· Colours - variations are recommended above.

· Details - additional detail is recommended to the west elevation. The wall cladding to the concourse area facing the oval is shown as steel sheeting and this is not sustainable to terms of damage and maintenance and the matching charcoal blockwork is recommended. The polycarbonate for the west elevation is to be selected and approved on the basis of a sample. Products such as Danpal are supported while standard polycarbonate sheeting would not be suitable for this context.

Council staff generally concur with these comments and recommendations. In terms of the bulk of the building, the higher part has been designed on the western side instead of the eastern side to allow for a future grandstand extension to be cantilevered over the amenities part of the Centre building. The visual bulk impacts are limited by the setback from Lords Place being sufficient for the height and bulk of the west elevation. Subject to the recommendations above in relation to colours, materials, detailing, graphics, and landscaping, the bulk of the building can be adequately mitigated in the streetscape and will result in adequate visual appearance for the character of the surrounding neighbourhood.

Overall it is considered that the amended design of the proposed Cricket Centre is compatible with the heritage setting and nearby residential areas in terms of design, character, siting, bulk and landscaping, subject to minor changes by way of conditions of consent discussed above.

Graphics Assessment

The proposed graphics on the western elevation (see Figure 5 earlier in this report) are not considered ‘signage’ pursuant to the definitions within the LEP or State Environmental Planning Policy 64 – Advertising and Signage. The applicant submits that they are an interpretation of the historical significance of cricket on the Wade Park site, depicting photos of important cricketers from the region. Internal signage is proposed to detail who the people are, why they are important to Wade Park, and the history of cricket in Orange and the region. They have been proposed to “break up” the Western Façade of the Cricket Centre and reflect cricketers and administrators recognised in Council’s Sporting Hall of Fame. It is proposed that these are adhesive graphics.

It is considered that the proposed graphics are too large in scale and draw attention to the bulk of the building, therefore would have adverse impacts on the character of the heritage setting, as well as visual impacts on nearby residences. Concerns are also raised in regards to the ongoing maintenance of the graphics impacting on the visual appearance of the building, site and streetscape.

Thus these graphics are not supported in their current form, and it is recommended that the elevation is amended as recommended previously by Council’s Urban Design and Heritage Advisor. A historical interpretation on the site is generally supported, however is not considered appropriate on the building, but would be better suited within the landscaped setting. As such, it is recommended that an interpretation strategy be developed to include these elements within the landscaping or grove planting.

Demolition and Tree Removal

Demolition and tree removal on a heritage listed site require consent under Clause 5.10 of the LEP. The demolition of existing buildings which no longer serve the needs of the site, including the greyhound pavilion, shed, former TAB building, racing tower, corporate box and storage shed all to the southwest of the main grandstand, is supported. Although these structures relate to the history of the site, they were erected much later than the original activities commenced and have no significant heritage merit.

Three (3) trees also need to be removed to facilitate the development. The removal of trees from a heritage listed site requires development consent from Council under Clause 5.10 of the LEP. It is considered that the amended proposal sufficiently retains the trees on the site with heritage significance, and those to be removed are not historically significant and are near the end of their lifespan. Appropriate replacement planting can be carried out to mitigate the loss of the trees to be removed.

The site is not known to contain any Aboriginal, European or archaeological relics, however the long-standing history of the use of the site suggests that relics may be uncovered. Conditions of consent are recommended to ensure that should site works uncover a potential relic or artefact, works will be halted to enable proper investigation by relevant authorities and the proponent required to seek relevant permits to either destroy or relocate the findings.

Overall the proposal meets the provisions of Clause 5.10 of the LEP subject to minor changes by way of conditions of consent, including developing an interpretative strategy for the site in place of the western elevation graphics.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

Not relevant to the application. The subject site is not located in an Urban Release Area.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.1 - Earthworks

This clause establishes a range of matters that must be considered prior to granting development consent for any application involving earthworks, such as:

(a) the likely disruption of, or any detrimental effect on, existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development

(b) the effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

(c) the quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both

(d) the effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining properties

(e) the source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material

(f) the likelihood of disturbing relics

(g) the proximity to and potential for adverse impacts on any waterway, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area

(h) any measures proposed to minimise or mitigate the impacts referred to in paragraph (g).

The earthworks proposed in the application are limited to the extent of cutting and filling required for demolition, tree removal and the proposed building. The earthworks can be appropriately supported onsite and the change in ground level is not substantial. Therefore the effect on the amenity of adjoining properties is considered to be minor. The extent of disruption to the drainage of the site is considered to be minor and will not detrimentally affect adjoining properties or nearby waterways. The extent of the earthworks will not materially affect the potential future use or redevelopment of the site that may occur at the end of the proposed development's lifespan.

The site is not known to be contaminated. As discussed previously, the site is not known to contain any Aboriginal, European or archaeological relics, however the long-standing history of the use of the site suggests that relics may be uncovered. As such, conditions of consent are recommended to ensure that should site works uncover a potential relic or artefact, works will be halted to enable proper investigation by relevant authorities and the proponent required to seek relevant permits to either destroy or relocate the findings.

Conditions are also recommended to require a sediment control plan during construction, including silt traps and other protective measures, to ensure that loose dirt and sediment does not escape the site boundaries.

7.3 - Stormwater Management

This clause applies to all industrial, commercial and residential zones and requires that Council be satisfied that the proposal:

(a) is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting onsite infiltration of water

(b) includes, where practical, onsite stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, groundwater or river water; and

(c) avoids any significant impacts of stormwater runoff on adjoining downstream properties, native bushland and receiving waters, or if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided, minimises and mitigates the impact.

Council’s Development Engineers have reviewed the proposed development in regards to stormwater management and recommend conditions of consent in relation to design of the driveway, stormwater drainage lines and onsite stormwater detention to limit peak outflows from the site to the pre-existing outflows. It is therefore considered that the post‑development runoff levels will not exceed the pre-development levels, and the development meets the requirement of this clause.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

This clause seeks to protect hydrological functions of groundwater systems and protect resources from both depletion and contamination. Orange has a high water table and large areas of the LGA, including the subject site, are identified with “Groundwater Vulnerability” on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. This requires that Council consider:

(a) whether or not the development (including any onsite storage or disposal of solid or liquid waste and chemicals) is likely to cause any groundwater contamination or have any adverse effect on groundwater dependent ecosystems, and

(b) the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

Furthermore consent may not be granted unless Council is satisfied that:

(a) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

(b) if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

(c) if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.

The proposal is not anticipated to involve the discharge of toxic or noxious substances and is therefore unlikely to contaminate the groundwater or related ecosystems. A condition of consent requiring a Trade Waste Application to be submitted to Council for consideration is recommended, and if applicable a Trade Waste Agreement will need to be entered into with Council. The proposal does not involve extraction of groundwater and will therefore not contribute to groundwater depletion.

The design and siting of the proposal avoids impacts on groundwater and is therefore considered acceptable.

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies and states:

Development consent must not be granted to development unless the consent authority is satisfied that any of the following services that are essential for the proposed development are available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make them available when required:

(a) the supply of water,

(b) the supply of electricity,

(c) the disposal and management of sewage,

(d) storm water drainage or on-site conservation,

(e) suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available to the land and are adequate or can be made adequate for the proposal. It is noted that the existing sewer main needs to be relocated clear of the proposed building and the vehicle access crossover needs to be upgraded for the purposes of this development. Relevant conditions of consent are attached.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 104 - Traffic-generating development

Pursuant to Clause 104 - Traffic-generating development of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (the “Infrastructure SEPP”), recreation facilities with a capacity of 200 or more vehicles need to be referred to Roads and Maritime Services (the ‘RMS’). In this case, the proposed Cricket Centre does not qualify as a development with relevant size and/or capacity under this clause. Accordingly, formal referral to the RMS is not necessary.

Notwithstanding this, the original and amended applications were referred to the RMS as a potentially interested party. The RMS has commented that they have no objection to the proposal, and recommend a condition of consent in regards to traffic and parking management plans for large events. This matter is discussed in greater detail in the DCP “Chapter 15 – Car Parking” assessment later in this report.

Clauses 85-87 - Development adjacent to rail corridors

Clauses 85, 86 and 87 of the Infrastructure SEPP deal with development in or adjacent to rail corridors; excavation in, above, below or adjacent to rail corridors; and impact of rail noise or vibration on non-rail development.

Clause 85 states in part:

(1) This clause applies to development on land that is in or adjacent to a rail corridor, if the development:

(a) is likely to have an adverse effect on rail safety, or

(b) involves the placing of a metal finish on a structure and the rail corridor concerned is used by electric trains, or

(c) involves the use of a crane in air space above any rail corridor, or

(d) is located within 5 meters of an exposed overhead electricity power line that is used for the purpose of railways or rail infrastructure facilities.

It is considered that the proposal is not likely to have an adverse effect on rail safety given the separation distance of the proposed Cricket Centre from the rail corridor (being over 200m away). The development is also separated by the main oval of Wade Park, Peisley Street, and partly by buildings between Peisley Street and the rail corridor. The rail corridor does not use electric trains or overhead electricity power lines. The application does not discuss whether a crane is required to construct the Centre, however if one is needed, it is likely to use Lords Place, which is well separated from the rail corridor. As such, it is considered that Clause 85 does not apply to the proposed development.

Clause 86 applies to excavation in, above, below or adjacent to rail corridors, in particular excavation in excess of 2m within 25 m of the rail corridor. As discussed above, the proposed development is well separated from the rail corridor, and does not involve such excavation. As such, Clause 87 is not applicable to this application.

Clause 87 looks at the impact of rail noise and vibration on non-rail development, including residential accommodation, place of public worship, a hospital, and educational establishments. The proposed development is not one of these uses that has the potential to be adversely impacted by rail noise or vibration, as such, this Clause is not applicable to this application.

John Holland Rail (“JHR”) was consulted as a neighbouring property to the proposed development and have submitted recommendations for Council to impose in relation to the proposal and the rail corridor. As it is considered that the safety of rail corridor will not be adversely impacted by the proposed development, these recommendations are not considered reasonable. An advisory note is recommended to the applicant in regards to the guidelines and Standards raised by JHR.

Notwithstanding the above, the Department of Planning’s ‘Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads - Interim Guideline (2008)’ has been taken into account in the assessment of this application. In particular, it is considered that the Cricket Centre is not a sensitive use that would be affected by rail or road noise or vibration, and the proposal encourages the use of public transport, facilitated through the proximity of the Centre to the bus and train station. The Guideline also recommends commuter parking to be provided as part of major developments near to train stations, however this is not considered appropriate in this case as the land is zoned for recreational purposes and any parking provided on the site should solely be for the uses of the park and not other uses.

In conclusion, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the Infrastructure SEPP or the guideline for development near rail corridors and busy roads.

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) is applicable. Pursuant to Clause 7 Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application:

(1) A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a) it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

(b) if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

Given the long standing history of the use of Wade Park for recreation and sporting activities, it is considered that past contaminating uses of the land is unlikely. A site inspection did not reveal any potential contamination of the site. On the basis of available evidence it is considered that the site is suitable for the proposed use and no further preliminary investigation is required to satisfy the requirements of the SEPP 55.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION 4.15(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s4.15(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land. An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant Planning Outcomes will be undertaken below.

Chapter 0.4-10 Interim Planning Outcomes - Residential Proximity

The proposed development is in close proximity to residential dwelling houses and as such the following planning outcomes are applicable:

· The design of industrial and commercial development is consistent or compatible with nearby residential areas in terms of design, siting and landscaping.

· The hours of operation, traffic and noise generation do not interfere with reasonable expectations of residential amenity.

· Noise-generating activities are contained within the building where practicable.

· Industrial air conditioning compressors are shielded to direct noise away from residential development.

· Car park and security lighting is positioned and shielded to prevent direct light spill onto residential properties.

· Measures to prevent dust, odour and chemical spray from reaching or affecting residential properties must be demonstrated.

· The design must demonstrate how residential privacy and solar access will be maintained.

The amended design of the proposed Cricket Centre is considered to be compatible with the nearby residential areas in terms of design, siting and landscaping, as assessed in the LEP Clause 5.10 section of this report. Given the separation distance of the proposed building from neighbouring properties, there will be no privacy or daylighting impacts.

The proposal does not involve any mechanical ventilation (ie compressors), or any activities that will generate dust, odour or chemical spray. Ventilation is discussed in greater detail below.

In terms of hours of operation and noise, the applicant has submitted a ‘Noise Impact Assessment’, prepared by Wilkinson Murray (number 17241 version B, and dated August 2018). The report was conducted in general accordance with the relevant noise guidelines and policy, and assessed noise impacts associated with activity inside the stadium as well as traffic noise in the carpark, and considered natural ventilation by louvers on the western and northern facades. The report states that the potentially worst affected receivers are considered to be located on Lords Place, with the closest receiver directly opposite the site, approximately 50m away. Residences are also located to the north on Moulder Street approximately 170m away, and to the south on Warrendine Street approximately 120m away.

The noise assessment carried out monitoring to establish existing background noise levels at the site. Noise measurements were also carried out at an existing indoor cricket centre at Five Docks to help determine predicted operational noise levels at the proposed Centre. During the Five Docks measurements, there were two games of indoor cricket and two bowling classes in the batting cages taking place, which is considered similar to the typical “worst case” scenario for the proposed Centre. Using the measured levels at Five Docks, noise predictions to properties surrounding Wade Park have been conducted and have assumed that the Centre is operating with all cricket nets in use concurrently. Conservatively, it has been assumed that the vents on the northern and western sides of the building provide no attenuation. Predicted noise from the informal car parking area adjacent to the Centre was also assessed, as well as the cumulative predicted noise levels from Centre operation and car parking within the same period. The results are presented in Table 3-4 and Figure 3-1 of the report, both copied below, which demonstrates compliance with the relevant noise criteria during the day and evening. The proposal does not involve any activities during the night time period (ie 10pm to 7am).

It is noted that the proposal relies on on-street parking for much of the parking demand generated by the Cricket Centre. These are existing marked parking spaces which can be used by the general public as well as surrounding uses (staff of commercial premises, visitors, residents etc). As such, noise generated from these spaces is already expected. While it is acknowledged that these on-street spaces are not currently used to their full potential and the proposed development will increase their use, it is expected that as Orange grows in population and the CBD expands, these spaces will be used more often.

It is also noted that the Centre is to be naturally ventilated using louvres on the northern and western sides of the building, and that no significant mechanical plant has been proposed at this stage. The noise assessment states that if mechanical plant is required at a later stage it should be designed to comply with the established project specific noise criteria. Council staff reject the claim that there will not be any mechanical plant and equipment, as the proposed Centre involves wet rooms (change room, toilets etc), a kitchen, and offices, which will require mechanical ventilation and/or heating and cooling. A condition of consent is recommended to require full details of all mechanical plant and equipment to be submitted for further assessment. It is also recommended that certification of noise compliance be provided to Council after completion of the building by way of condition of consent.

The noise assessment concludes that the predicted noise levels from activities inside the Centre and in the informal carpark meet the criteria for the day and evening periods for all nearby receivers, and as such the proposed development is unlikely to cause any adverse noise impact on surrounding receivers. Council staff generally concur with these conclusions, subject to the recommended conditions of consent relating to mechanical plant and equipment and certification of compliance. The report states that the Centre opens at 9am, however proposed opening hours are from 7am. As the same noise criteria applies to the land between 7-9am, the report still demonstrates that compliance can be achieved.

Traffic and car parking is assessed in detail in DCP Chapter 15 below, where it is concluded that the proposal is acceptable in this regard and will not adversely impact on the surrounding uses. No formal car park is proposed, however conditions of consent are recommended in regards to outdoor lighting not impacting on residential neighbours.

Chapter 2 - Natural Resource Management

Chapter 2 provides planning outcomes for stormwater quality, groundwater quality, soil resource management, vegetation management, and flora and fauna management; all of which have been considered previously in the LEP and Section 1.7 of the Act assessments.

Chapter 3.4-1 - Waste Generation

The DCP sets out the following planning outcomes for waste generation:

· Applications involving demolition indicate measures that will be implemented for reuse and recycling of waste materials.

· Development involving demolition is carried out in a manner that optimises reuse and recycling of waste materials consistent with waste-minimisation principles.

A waste management plan has not been provided with the application, however it is considered that demolition can be carried out in accordance with the above outcomes. A condition of consent is recommended to this effect.

Chapter 11 - Land Used for Open Space and Recreation

Pursuant to the Local Government Act 1993 and Crown Land Management Act 2016 Wade Park is not classified as public, community or operational land. Accordingly, the land is zoned for ‘private’ recreation. The planning outcome in this chapter relates to public recreational land and states that the land should be used in accordance with the relevant adopted plan of management. There is no plan of management for Wade Park. Thus this chapter and planning outcome of the DCP do not apply. A Master Plan has been produced for Wade Park, which is addressed later in this report.

Chapter 13 - Heritage

The DCP sets out the following planning outcomes for heritage:

· Development relates to the significant features of heritage buildings on or near the site, as reflected in inventory sheets.

· Development conforms with recognised conservation principles.

· The Community is provided with sufficient information to be able to consider and comment on the proposed development.

Heritage has been discussed in detail in the LEP Clause 5.10 assessment earlier in this report, where it was concluded that subject to minor changes in regards to materials and detailing, the amended proposal will not adversely impact on the heritage significance of the site or other nearby heritage items, nor adversely impact on the surrounding heritage setting. The proposed graphics on the western elevation are not supported as discussed previously, and alternative recommendations have been made in this regard. Community consultation was carried out in accordance with the DCP, which is discussed later in this report under “Any Submissions Made in Accordance with the Act s4.15(1)(d)” below.

Chapter 15 – Car Parking

The DCP sets out the following planning outcomes for car parking:

· Adequate off-street car parking is provided in accordance with the Table or, alternatively, according to an assessment that demonstrates peak-parking demand based on recognised research.

· Car-parking areas are designed according to Australian Standard.

· Car-park areas include adequate lighting and landscaping (preferably deciduous shade trees), which provides for the personal security of users.

· Bicycle-parking facilities are provided according to the relevant Australian Standard.

· Facilities for loading and unloading of commercial vehicles are provided according to the relevant Australian Standard.

The DCP states that off-street car parking shall be provided at the applicable rate set out in Table 15.4 of the DCP, however there is no rate for recreational facilities or sporting uses. For development not listed in the table, the DCP states that the number of parking spaces required needs to be determined by Council, taking into account the likely peak-parking demand that will be generated from the development. In this case, a traffic report carried out by a suitable professional traffic consultant was required.

The applicant has submitted a ‘Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment’, prepared by McLaren Traffic Engineering & Road Traffic Consultants (reference number 18536.01FA and dated 27 August 2018). The report states that the proposal does not include any formalised onsite parking, with all expected parking utilising the existing on-street, publicly available parking in the surrounding streets, and the existing informal parking on various grassed areas within Wade Park.

The report estimates the car parking demand for the Cricket Centre. For each parking scenario it was assumed that each game/cricket batting session would run for approximately one hour, and as a worst case scenario that each player will drive individually to the site. The estimated demand was based on 100% overlap of arrival and departure times between one game finishing and the following game starting. The estimated demand is set out in Table 2 of the report and copied below:

As shown, the worst-case scenario for parking demand is when four (4) cricket batting cages are in use, plus one (1) indoor cricket game, which would require approximately 52 car parking spaces. This demand is based on 26 people playing on the field, each of whom drives to the site individually, and 26 people arriving before the end of the previous session/game, each of whom drives individually.

The proposal does not include any formalised off-street parking spaces, however there are various level areas within Wade Park that are currently used for informal parking during sports events. In addition, there are 45-degree angle parking spaces on all roads surrounding Wade Park, providing a large supply of car parking that is not in high demand from other nearby land uses, as demonstrated by parking survey carried out by the consultant.

The report states that to establish the existing occupancy of parking surrounding the site during the proposed operating hours of the Centre, parking surveys were undertaken between the times of 3pm and 7pm on Wednesday, 20 September 2017 within and on the roads immediately surrounding Wade Park. The results of the parking surveys during the peak time observed are summarised in Table 1 of the report, copied below:

As shown, there is in excess of 300 parking spaces available in the area surrounding the site during weekday afternoon hours, which is the expected peak operating times for the Centre. The peak parking demand was observed at 3pm (ie school pick-up time), and the demand was seen to decrease from that point onwards, as illustrated in Figure 4 of the report, copied below:

The report goes on to say that some informal parking was observed in Wade Park during the survey, with a maximum of 10 vehicles observed for less than 15 minutes. A total of 11 cars were observed parking within the grounds of Wade Park during the four hour survey period.

Based on the parking surveys, should the worst-case parking demand of 52 vehicles occur, there will be ample space available on the streets surrounding Wade Park to accommodate the estimated demand. A total of 166 car parking spaces would remain available on the streets for other users of the site and of neighbouring sites. The report notes that this is considered to be a significant quantum of spare parking, and that the peak parking demand will likely occur during late afternoon hours when additional parking is available, rather than the 3pm peak observed during the survey.

The report concludes that considering that the proposed facility will provide a community benefit and is located in close proximity to other similar land uses, ample on-street parking, and nearby bus and train services, even under an extremely worst-case scenario, the use of on-street parking will be more than adequate to cater for the estimated demand, with spare parking highly likely to still be available in the surrounds.

Council staff concur with the comments set out in the submitted report. Although the car parking survey was only carried out during one afternoon, it is considered that it accurately reflects the peak use of the surrounding streets on any given day outside of any major events being held at Wade Park (concerts, large sporting games etc). Concerns were raised about the availability of parking for the Centre during such events, and the applicant responded that the Council will control the use of the Cricket Centre, and it will not be open for practise and games at the same time as large events. The amenities provided within the Centre (toilets, change rooms, canteen etc) can be utilised as part of large events to augment existing facilities on the site, but would not increase the overall parking demand for such events, where patrons will already be onsite.

It is also noted that the proposal includes the demolition of existing buildings on the site, which represent a historical car parking demand. When taking the parking credits that apply to the former use of these buildings into consideration, the net increase in car parking demand for the site is not considered significant.

It is further noted that the site is not located within the Orange Car Parking Contribution Development Contribution Plan 2015 catchment (see Figure 11), therefore a monetary contribution cannot be levied against the car parking shortfall.

Figure 11 - Car Parking Contribution catchment map (green = subject site)

Overall it is considered that appropriate car parking is available in the surrounding area and is suitable for the proposed development. Notwithstanding this, the DCP and Building Code of Australia (BCA) set out requirements for bicycle and disabled parking respectively. It is considered there is ample room available either within the site or on the street adjacent to the proposed Centre to cater for this type of parking, and their provision would have an overall benefit to the community. Conditions of consent are recommended to this effect.

In regards to servicing and loading, the DCP requires that appropriate loading facilities be provided to all forms of development. The submitted traffic report states that for its ongoing operation, the Centre is likely to require the deliveries of food and beverages. It is expected that these deliveries would be undertaken by a van which has dimensions similar to a large passenger vehicle. These deliveries can be undertaken from the angled parking within Lords Place or from within the site. Larger vehicles making deliveries for events can gain access within the site via the existing paved internal roadways within Wade Park under the supervision of appropriately qualified traffic control personnel and event managers’ delegated servicing personnel. This is considered adequate. Council’s Technical Services officers have no objection to the proposed arrangements.

As noted earlier in this report, the application does not need to be referred to the RMS as ‘traffic generating development’ under State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. The RMS was consulted as an interested party on the original application and the amended application. They comment that they have no objection to the proposed development, and offer a recommendation for Councils consideration as follows:

“Detailed traffic and parking management plans are to be prepared and implemented prior to and during large events at Wade Park. The traffic management plans are to consider and provide a high level of safety for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Where practical and available, public transport should be utilised to minimise demand on on-street parking”.

Large events and sports games at Wade Park are already subject to agreements with Council in regards to the use of the land, where Council’s events, sports and recreation staff carry out risk assessments for each event, and on a case-by-case basis determine whether traffic and/or pedestrian management is required. Furthermore, the Cricket Centre proposal is not directly related to large events on the site other than augmenting existing amenities, and such a condition could not be tied to this application, as established in relevant case law.

Infill Guidelines

Development in a heritage setting must be assessed against Council’s Infill Guidelines. Heritage has been discussed in detail in the LEP Clause 5.10 assessment earlier in this report, where it was concluded that the amended proposal will not adversely impact on the heritage significance of the site or other nearby heritage items, nor adversely impact on the surrounding heritage setting, subject to change in regards to materials, detailing, and historical interpretation on the site instead of on the building.

Wade Park Master Plan

Although not an adopted planning instrument, consideration shall be given to Council’s Wade Park Master Plan 2012. The Master Plan provides a long term vision for the site, including what it should look like and how it should function in the future. Issues identified in the Master Plan include grandstand and seating, provision of player, coach and official amenities, corporate entertainment facilities, field lighting, ticketing and entry/exit points, kiosk and catering facilities, dual use of the facility (cricket and rugby league), maintaining local heritage character, and impact of drought and water restrictions.

Consultation was undertaken as part of the Master Plan, which highlighted the need to upgrade the grandstand and canteen, and provide a multi-functional building to replace sub-standard buildings. It was also identified that the site is a high quality facility for country cricket, however clashes with the rugby league season (ie summer).

The vision for the Master Plan is “to create the premier sporting and community event venue within Orange which is central and easily accessible”. The concept plan provides for cricket facilities separate from the main oval, including nets and fields, in the north-western corner of the site. Although the proposed Centre deviates from this in terms of location and being an indoor facility, it meets the overall aims of the Master Plan. It is also noted that the Master Plan provides for grandstand extensions and upgrades, and formalised car parking within the site, which the applicant states is the intention in the medium-longer term. These will be subject to separate future applications.

SECTION 64 WATER AND SEWER HEADWORKS

Pursuant to Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, water and sewer headworks charges are applicable at a rate of 8.8 ETs for water and 13.2 ETs for sewer. Relevant conditions of consent requiring payment are attached.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s4.15(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal involves the demolition of existing buildings on the site. A condition is attached requiring the demolition to be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601 - 1991: The Demolition of Structures. A waste management plan also needs to be provided, and a relevant condition of consent is attached.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93) and Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

The proposal is capable of complying with the relevant fire safety requirements. Relevant conditions of consent are attached.

The proposal involves a new building, therefore the upgrading provisions are not relevant.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

BASIX is not applicable to the proposed development. A Section J energy efficiency statement will be required with the Construction Certificate application.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s4.15(1)(b)

Heritage and Visual Impacts

As discussed in the DCP assessment, the proposed development will not result in any unreasonable visual impacts in the locality, subject to minor changes in regards to materials and detailing of the building, and landscaping. The proposed graphics on the western elevation are not supported due to their extensive scale having adverse impacts on the streetscape, and it is recommended that an interpretive strategy is developed for the site in place of the western elevation graphics.

Overall it is considered that the amended proposal is acceptable in terms of design, siting and scale, and will not adversely impact on the visual, residential and heritage setting of the neighbourhood.

Neighbourhood Amenity Impacts

As noted above, visual impacts to nearby residential dwellings are unlikely. The applicant has submitted a ‘Noise Impact Assessment’ as discussed in the DCP assessment earlier in this report, where it was concluded that the proposed Centre would comply with daytime and evening noise criteria when taking a worst-case scenario into account. Council staff generally concur with this report, however recommend conditions of consent in relation to plant and equipment (air conditioning units, kitchen and bathroom ventilation etc), and the constructed building demonstrating compliance with the relevant noise criteria. Subject to further assessment and possible noise attenuation measures being installed, the proposed development is unlikely to adversely impact on the amenity of surrounding residential dwellings.

Traffic Impacts

Car parking has been discussed previously in the DCP assessment, where it was concluded that the estimated parking demand was based on a worst case scenario (ie four simultaneous cricket batting cages in use plus one indoor game being played, both occurring within a single hour, and each person driving individually to the Centre) equating to 52 spaces. While no formal onsite car parking is proposed as part of the proposal, the peak parking demand can be absorbed by the existing informal parking in Wade Park and the supply of on-street parking in the surrounding roads without adversely impacting on the onsite or surrounding on-street parking network. It is recommended that disabled and bicycle parking be provided adjacent to the Centre within the site or on Lords Place.

The submitted traffic report discusses traffic generation and impacts. It notes that the “RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments” (2002) does not provide estimated traffic generation levels for the indoor sports facilities, and therefore the traffic generation will be based on a first principles approach. Under an extremely worst-case assessment it was assumed that everyone travelling to the site will drive to and from the site individually. Expected peak operation times will occur in the afternoon period between 5-8pm on weekdays and 9am–midday on weekends. The resulting traffic generation is summarised in Table 3 of the report, and copied below.

As shown in the table, the peak traffic generated by the site equates to 52 vehicles trips (26 in and 26 out) in one hour, based upon a rate of 2 vehicle trips per player. The report goes on to state that it is expected that a generation of 52 vehicle trips in one hour can be easily absorbed by the surrounding road network, and will not have a detrimental effect on the nearby intersection performance or residential amenity. Council staff concur with these conclusions.

As discussed earlier in this report, the application does not need to be referred to the RMS as ‘traffic generating development’ under State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. The RMS was consulted as an interested party on the original application and the amended application, and commented that they have no objection to the proposed development, and offered a recommendation in regards to traffic and parking management plans for large events. Large events and sports games at Wade Park are not relevant to this application, and are already subject to agreements with Council in regards to the use of the land, which requires traffic management plans when deemed necessary (assessed on a case by case basis).

It is considered that the traffic generation of the proposed development, which is expected to peak on weekday evenings after the typical commuter peak and on weekends, has been estimated at around 52 trips. While this level of traffic generation will be noticeable in the immediate vicinity at peak times, it will otherwise be fairly evenly distributed throughout the road network, which can sufficiently cater for the increased movements.

Overall it is considered that the proposed development and will not have an adverse effect on the surrounding road or car parking networks.

Environmental Impacts

The proposal is unlikely to have adverse impacts on the natural environment by reason of the emission of noise, dust, odours etc. Conditions of consent are recommended to protect the natural environment during construction, as well as ensure ongoing management of stormwater etc.

The removal of trees is supported on the basis that they will be replaced with suitable species. A condition of consent is recommended to this effect.

Social and Economic Impacts

The proposed development is unlikely to generate a negative social or economic impact within the locality. The proposed Centre will enhance recreational and sporting functions of Wade Park and within the City, providing an overall community benefit.

Cumulative impacts

The development will contribute to the use of Wade Park as a premier sporting facility in Orange, and can be constructed and carried out in a manner that is consistent with the neighbourhood character, subject to conditions of consent discussed above. Overall, it is considered that cumulative impacts are unlikely.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s4.15(1)(c)

The subject land is considered suitable for the proposed development due to the following:

· recreational uses are permitted in the RE2 zone pursuant to the LEP;

· the proposal seeks to continue using the land for recreational purposes;

· the proposal will not adversely impact on nearby residential areas, subject to conditions of consent;

· there is no known contamination on the land;

· all utility services are or can be made available and adequate for the proposal;

· the site is not subject to known natural hazards;

· the subject land has no biodiversity or habitat value;

· the site is not in proximity to any waterway, drinking water catchment or sensitive area;

· the site is not known to contain any Aboriginal, European or archaeological relics; and

· the site has direct frontage and can provide suitable access to Lords Place, and can be accessed from within Wade Park from the Moulder Street main access point.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s4.15(1)(d)

The proposed development is defined as "advertised development" under the provisions of the DCP. The original application was advertised in Orange City Life on Thursday, 26 October 2017 and neighbouring properties notified. Exhibition closed on Friday, 8 November 2017. Five (5) submissions were received. The submissions raised the following points:

· size of the building unnecessarily large for residentially zoned area, deviates from the Master Plan, and there is no demand for extra sports other than cricket;

· heritage principles not met, and proposed colours and tree plantings will not mitigate impacts;

· parking – do not agree with survey numbers in submitted traffic report, where Moulder Street and Lords Place are virtually full all day at peak times 8.30am-5.30pm and end of school times; a request to Council to time limit parking on the western side of Lords Place has not been resolved to date; and although cricket at Wade Park does not cause parking issues, object to rugby league crowds which fill the vicinity; and object to no additional parking being provided for the facility; and

· noise – building insulation will not mitigate impacts of vehicular noise.

The RMS also submitted a letter in regards to the proposal, which has been discussed previously in this report. Neighbours request that the building size be reduced, that the building be moved to the Peisley Street side of the site, more parking be provided, and Council undertakes a separate grandstand extension.

These concerns were feedback to the applicant, and an amended application was received by Council on 10 August 2018, advertised in Orange City Life on Thursday, 31 August 2018 and neighbouring properties notified. Exhibition closed on Friday, 14 September 2018. Two (2) were submissions received. Those submissions raised the following points:

· heritage impacts to dwellings opposite site, and inconsistent with listed grandstand;

· parking – object to additional trees in street, on-street survey rates, increase in on‑street parking demand, exacerbating existing parking issues (ie CBD parking in nearby streets, CBD expansion), clash of parking demand with league games which attract a high attendance, and being verbally abused by nearby commercial staff that use the on-street parking;

· noise impacts – excessive hours, building insulation will not mitigate noise from vehicles;

· viability and costs of the facility; and

· potential reduction in property values.

Both of these submissions note that the amendment to the size of the building (ie reduced) is an improvement compared to the original proposal. John Holland Rail also submitted a letter in regards to the proposal, which has been discussed previously in this report.

The issues raised above have been addressed in the main body of the report, with the exception of viability and property values, which are not considerations under planning legislation and regulations. It is also noted that the grandstand is not heritage listed as it was added to the site in 1977, and is not considered of particular merit. Notwithstanding this, the whole of the site is heritage listed, and impacts to the setting have been considered in the LEP Clause 5.10 assessment. Noise has been assessed in the DCP assessment, and it is considered that impacts can be adequately mitigated.

Car parking has also been addressed in the DCP assessment, where staff concur with the comments and survey carried out by the applicant’s traffic consultant. While it is acknowledged that CBD staff use the surrounding streets for daytime parking, this is considered reasonable and expected for a thriving town centre. Furthermore, there will be more than ample available on-street spaces to cater for the worst-case demand for the Cricket Centre as well as other uses in the area, including after-school pick-ups and ad‑hoc uses of Wade Park. The applicant states that the Centre will be closed during major events and games at the park, which will mitigate potential conflicts in car parking demand.

Neighbours have made requests in regards to the building being used for football change rooms, provision of more grandstand seating being provided away from afternoon sun, that the Ophir Car Park be promoted for CBD staff car parking as it is under-utilized at present, and that on street parking on the western side of Lords Place be time restricted.

The applicant notes that the proposed Centre will provide amenities that will supplement those existing on the site, and that an extension to grandstand seating will be proposed in the future. Submissions during both exhibition periods bring up existing parking issues in the general area which are outside the scope of this application, and it is recommended that these matters be addressed further by the Traffic Committee.

Four (4) late submissions were also made following this exhibition period, which all state that they have no objections to the amended size and siting of the building, however remain concerned about car parking issues. Three of those submissions also reiterate potential noise issues. No additional issues have been raised that have not already been discussed in previous submissions above.

PUBLIC INTEREST s4.15(1)(e)

The potential impacts of the proposed development will be relatively local in nature, however due to the community benefit of improved sports facilities at Wade Park, the application is considered to be of interest to the wider public. The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines etc that have not been considered in this assessment. Overall it is considered that local impacts can be adequately mitigated and the proposed Centre will result in a community benefit.

SUMMARY

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. The proposed development complies with the relevant aims, objectives and provisions of Orange LEP 2011 (as amended) and DCP 2004. A Section 4.15 assessment of the development indicates that the development is acceptable in this instance. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval outlining a range of conditions considered appropriate to ensure that the development proceeds in an acceptable manner.

COMMENTS

The requirements of Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor, Engineering Development Section, and Urban Design and Heritage Advisor are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

Attachments

1 Notice of Approval, D18/50873 ⇩

2 Plans, D18/50243 ⇩

3 Submissions, D18/50226 ⇩

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.3 Development Application DA 362/2017(1) - Lot 701 Lords Place (Wade Park)

Attachment 1 Notice of Approval

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

Development Application No DA 362/2017(1)

NA18/ Container PR7095

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 4.18

Development Application
Applicant Name:	Orange City Council
Applicant Address:	PO Box 35 ORANGE NSW 2800
Owner’s Name:	Orange City Council
Land to Be Developed:	Lot 701 DP 1001618 – Wade Park, Lords Place, Orange
Proposed Development:	Recreation Facility (indoor) in Association with the Existing Recreation Facility (major) and Demolition

Building Code of Australia building classification:	As determined by Certifier

Determination made under Section 4.16
Made On:	2 October 2018
Determination:	CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

Consent to Operate From:	3 October 2018
Consent to Lapse On:	3 October 2023

Terms of Approval

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

(1) To ensure a quality urban design for the development which complements the surrounding environment.

(2) To maintain neighbourhood amenity and character.

(3) To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(4) To provide adequate public health and safety measures.

(5) Because the development will require the provision of, or increase the demand for, public amenities and services.

(6) To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

(7) To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(8) To minimise the impact of development on the environment.

Conditions

(1) The development must be carried out in accordance with:

(a) Plan/s numbered DA00-10 Rev P2, prepared by Clarke Keller, dated 31 July 2018 (11 sheets); and Landscape Plan number DA-L1 Rev B, prepared by Sala4D, dated 07-08-18

(b) statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

(2) All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

(3) A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a) showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

(b) showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(4) Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate full amended plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, Councils Manager Development Assessments to address the following:

- Landscaping plans providing a form of grove planting and additional trees between the Cricket Centre building and the Lords Place frontage sufficient to provide an upper canopy of 4-8m height; and ground level planting (ground covers and native grasses) allowing for an open ground plane while providing screening improvement to the setting, extending from the Tennis Court alignment to the northern alignment of the grandstand;

- Amended western elevations without graphics, which are not supported, and the addition of vertical elements such as 200mm blades at 6300mm centres within the polycarbonate sunscreen to add extra scale to this extended element;

- An “Interpretation Strategy” to provide for historical interpretation on the site, instead of on the building, such as within the landscaping;

- The vertical cladding to the larger 01 form and smaller 02 form to be varied to provide a Windspray colour to the 01 element, and Shale Grey as proposed to the 02 element to reduce visual bulk;

- Provision of disabled parking within the site adjacent to the Cricket Centre in accordance with the Building Code Australia and relevant Standards;

- Provision of bicycle parking within the site adjacent to the Cricket Centre in accordance with relevant Standards; and

- Full details of mechanical plant and equipment required for the Centre (kitchen ventilation, wet room ventilation, heating, cooling, etc.).

(5) Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a sample of the proposed polycarbonate sheeting for the western elevation shall be submitted to, and approved by, Councils Manager Development Assessments.

(6) An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act is to be sought from Orange City Council, as the Water and Sewer Authority, for alterations to water and sewer. No plumbing and drainage is to commence until approval is granted.

(7) The applicant is to submit a waste management plan that describes the nature of wastes to be removed, the wastes to be recycled and the destination of all wastes. All wastes from the demolition and construction phases of this project are to be deposited at a licensed or approved waste disposal site.

(8) Engineering plans providing complete details of the proposed driveway and car parking areas are to be submitted to Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) upon application for a Construction Certificate. These plans are to provide details of levels, cross falls of all pavements, proposed sealing materials and proposed drainage works and are to be in accordance with Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(9) The existing 375mm diameter stormwater drainage lines are to be relocated clear of the proposed building. Engineering plans for this drainage system are to be submitted to and approved by Orange City Council prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(10) The existing 150mm-diameter sewer main is to be relocated clear of the proposed building. Engineering plans for this sewer system are to be submitted to and approved by Orange City Council prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(11) A Liquid Trade Waste Application is to be submitted to Orange City Council prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate. The application is to be in accordance with Orange City Council’s Liquid Trade Waste Policy. Engineering plans submitted as part of the application are to show details of all proposed liquid trade waste pre-treatment systems and their connection to sewer.

Where applicable, the applicant is to enter into a Liquid Trade Waste Service Agreement with Orange City Council in accordance with the Orange City Council Liquid Trade Waste Policy.

(12) Payment of contributions for water, sewer and drainage works is required to be made at the contribution rate applicable at the time that the payment is made. The contributions are based on 8.8 ETs for water supply headworks and 13.2 ETs for sewerage headworks. A Certificate of Compliance, from Orange City Council in accordance with the Water Management Act 2000, will be issued upon payment of the contributions.

This Certificate of Compliance is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(13) A water and soil erosion control plan is to be submitted to Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) for approval prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate. The control plan is to be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the Landcom, Managing Urban Stormwater; Soils and Construction Handbook.

(14) The development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater detention within the development, designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of lower frequency (that is, a rarer event) without damage to downstream developments. Where appropriate, the spillway design capacity is to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Dam Safety Committee.

The design of the detention storage is to be undertaken using the ILSAX/DRAINS rainfall-runoff hydrologic model or an approved equivalent capable of assessing runoff volumes and their temporal distribution as well as peak flow rates. The model is to be used to calculate the flow rates for the existing and post-development conditions. The developed flows are to be routed through the proposed storage within the model so that the outflows obtained are no greater than the flows obtained for the pre-existing natural flows. A report detailing the results of the analysis, which includes:

· catchment plan showing sub-catchments under existing and developed conditions;

· schematic diagram of the catchment model showing sub areas and linkages;

· tabulation detailing the elevation, storage volume and discharge relationships; and

· tabulation for the range of frequencies analysed, the inflows, outflows and peak storage levels for both existing and developed conditions;

together with copies of the data files for the model and engineering design plans of the required drainage system are to be submitted to Orange City Council upon application for a Construction Certificate.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(15) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

(16) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available onsite.

(17) The location and depth of the sewer junction/connection to Council’s sewerage system is to be determined to ensure that adequate fall to the sewer is available.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(18) If Aboriginal objects, relics, or other historical items or the like are located during development works, all works in the area of the identified object, relic or item shall cease, and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), and representatives from the Orange Local Aboriginal Land Council shall be notified. Where required, further archaeological investigation shall be undertaken. Development works in the area of the find(s) may recommence if and when outlined by the management strategy, developed in consultation with and approved by the OEH.

(19) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(20) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(21) Building demolition is to be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard 2601:2001 - The Demolition of Structures and the requirements of Safe Work NSW.

(22) The fit-out of the food preparation and storage areas are to be installed in accordance with the requirements of Food Safety Standard 3.2.3 "Food Premises and Equipment" of the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code and Australian Standard 4674-2004 "Design and construction and fit-out of food premises".

(23) No portion of the building - including footings, eaves, overhang and service pipes - shall encroach into any easement.

(24) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

(25) The provisions and requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code are to be applied to this application and all work constructed within the development is to be in accordance with that Code.

The developer is to be entirely responsible for the provision of water, sewerage and drainage facilities capable of servicing the development from Council’s existing infrastructure. The developer is to be responsible for gaining access over adjoining land for services where necessary and easements are to be created about all water, sewer and drainage mains within and outside the lots they serve.

(26) A heavy-duty concrete kerb and gutter layback and footpath crossing is to be constructed in the position shown on the plan submitted with the Construction Certificate application. The works are to be carried out to the requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(27) The existing kerb and gutter layback that is not proposed to be used is to be replaced with standard concrete kerb and gutter and the adjacent footpath area re‑graded to the shape and level requirements of footpaths in the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

(28) All driveway and parking areas are to be sealed with bitumen, hot mix or concrete and are to be designed for all expected loading conditions (provided however that the minimum pavement depth for gravel and flush seal roadways is 200mm) and be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

(29) Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the amended approved plans and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(30) Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, disabled and bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with the amended approved plans and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(31) Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, certification that all mechanical plant and equipment has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions shall be submitted to and approved to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(32) No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

(33) The owner of the building/s must cause the Council to be given a Final Fire Safety Certificate on completion of the building in relation to essential fire or other safety measures included in the schedule attached to this approval.

(34) Where Orange City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a final inspection of water connection, sewer and stormwater drainage shall be undertaken by Orange City Council and a Final Notice of Inspection issued, prior to the issue of either an interim or a final Occupation Certificate.

(35) A Certificate of Compliance, from a Qualified Engineer, stating that the stormwater detention basin complies with the approved engineering plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

(36) Certification from Orange City Council is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate stating that all works relating to connection of the development to Council assets, works on public land, works on public roads, stormwater, sewer and water reticulation mains and footpaths have been carried out in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the foregoing conditions, and that Council will take ownership of the infrastructure assets.

(37) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

(38) The hours of operation of the premises shall not exceed Monday to Saturday 7.00am to 10.00pm, and 8.00am to 9.00pm Sundays and public holidays.

(39) A separate development application shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the erection of any external signage on the site, in accordance with the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 and State Environmental Planning Policy 64 – Advertising and Signage.

(40) Outdoor lighting must be in accordance with the Australian Standard 4282-1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

(41) An assessment of the development in terms of noise shall be verified through testing at nearby receivers, and be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager Building and Environment within three (3) months of the occupation of the development. If compliance with the relevant noise standards has not been achieved, noise attenuation measures need to be undertaken in accordance with recommendations made by a suitably qualified noise engineer, and to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Building and Environment.

(42) Emitted noise shall not exceed 5dB(A) above background sound level measured at the nearest affected residence.

(43) Glare from internal lighting is not permitted to extend beyond the limits of the building authorised by this approval.

(44) Any light fittings fitted to the exterior of the building or on the site are to be shielded or mounted in a position to minimise glare to adjoining and nearby properties, in accordance with the relevant Standards.

(45) The owner is required to provide to Council and to the NSW Fire Commissioner an Annual Fire Safety Statement in respect of the fire-safety measures, as required by Clause 177 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

ADVISORY NOTES

(1) Nothing in this consent allows access to Transport for NSW land (or airspace).

(2) The applicant is advised of the Department of Planning’s ‘Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads - Interim Guideline (2008)’, John Holland Rail Network Rules, and AS 2550 series of Australian Standards (Cranes, Hoist and Winches), including AS2550 15-1994 Cranes – Safe Use – Concrete Placing Equipment, which may be applicable to this development being adjacent to a rail corridor.

Other Approvals

(1) Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under section 68.

Nil

(2) General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

Nil

Right of Appeal

*Disability Discrimination* Act 1992:	This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation. The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.

*Disclaimer - S88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 -* Restrictions on the Use of Land:**	The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.

Signed:	On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL
Signature:
Name:	PAUL JOHNSTON - MANAGER DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENTS
Date:	3 October 2018

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.4 Development Application DA 16/2018(1) - 38-40 Rosemary Lane

RECORD NUMBER: 2018/2398

AUTHOR: Kelly Walker, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	23 January 2018
Applicant/s	Mr RM Pitt
Owner/s	Ms JO Pitt
Land description	Lot 100 DP 857135 – 38-40 Rosemary Lane, Orange
Proposed land use	Subdivision (two lot residential), Demolition (tree removal), Dwelling and Attached Garage, and Subdivision (two lot residential)
Value of proposed development	$200,000

Council's consent is sought for subdivision, tree removal, and construction of a new dwelling with attached garage at Lot 100 DP 857135, known as 38-40 Rosemary Lane, Orange (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 - locality plan

The proposed subdivision involves two stages, the first to create a new vacant battleaxe lot to the rear (two lot Torrens), and the second stage seeks to subdivide the existing duplex onto their own lots (two lot Torrens with party wall). Over both stages, the site will result in three residential lots. The new dwelling will be constructed on the new battleaxe block and comprises a single storey, two (2) bedroom dwelling house with attached single garage. The existing olive tree in the rear garden will need to be removed to facilitate the development.

The proposal has been formally amended three times to stage the subdivision, as well as to alter the design of the new dwelling and proposed landscaping following feedback from Council staff and submissions from neighbours. Concerns raised included visual privacy impacts, visual bulk impacts, potential overshadowing of neighbouring properties, inappropriate visual appearance, heritage impacts, insufficient areas of private open space, landscaping, and vehicle manoeuvring. The application and its amendments have been publically exhibited three times.

The applicant has worked with Council in regards to the issues raised and has reduced the new dwelling to single storey, single garage and two (2) bedrooms. Proposed landscaping has also been altered. It is considered that the latest amendment has made a serious attempt to fit the form of the proposed new dwelling within the building envelope, to use traditional materials, to model the bulk and scale of neighbouring buildings, and to minimise impacts on neighbours and the environment.

Overall, the proposed development is permitted with the consent of Council and is considered to be consistent with the relevant aims, objectives and planning outcomes of Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP) and Orange Development Control Plan 2004 (DCP). As such, it is recommended that Council supports the proposed development as amended. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval.

RECENT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents: Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.

All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. The DCP enables developers and architects to use design to achieve the planning outcomes in alternative ways.

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The proposal has been formally amended three times to stage the subdivision and reconfigure the proposed new dwelling design. Various iterations of the earlier development involved the construction of a two storey dwelling on the proposed battleaxe allotment. The two storey configuration of the dwelling was not considered appropriate for the locality. Council staff requested that the applicant reconsider the design following the initial stages of public consultation. The applicant has worked with Council in regards to the issues raised and has reduced the new dwelling to single storey, single garage and two bedrooms. Proposed landscaping has also been altered.

It is considered that the latest amendment has made a serious attempt to fit the form of the proposed new dwelling within its surrounds. While the proposed battleaxe lot is substantially smaller than the recommended 650m² and does not adjoin public open space, the DCP guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes, and acknowledges that there can be other solutions to meeting the planning outcomes where each design is considered on its merit.

The intention of the minimum 650m² guideline is to ensure that adequate residential amenity can be provided while not adversely impacting on neighbouring amenity, as well as providing adequate servicing to the site. The applicant has demonstrated that adequate access, servicing, solar access, privacy and amenity can be provided to the existing, proposed and neighbouring dwellings in accordance with the DCP. On balance, the planning outcomes for urban residential development and subdivision can be met, therefore the proposed development can be supported in this case.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “10.1 Preserve - Engage with the community to ensure plans for growth and development are respectful of our heritage”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 16/2018(1) for Subdivision (two lot residential), Demolition (tree removal), Dwelling and Attached Garage, and Subdivision (two lot residential) at Lot 100 DP 857135 – 38-40 Rosemary Lane, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE PROPOSAL

As amended, the proposal involves two main stages as follows:

Stage 1: Subdivision of the existing lot to create a new vacant battleaxe lot to the rear (two lot Torrens) - proposed Lot 200 measuring 426.9m².

Stage 2: Subdivision of the existing duplex on the front lot (two lot Torrens with party wall) - proposed Lot 201 (eastern duplex) measuring 197.3m², and proposed Lot 202 (western duplex), measuring 208.7m²; as well as tree removal and construction of a new dwelling on the new rear battleaxe block.

The proposed new dwelling is a single storey house comprising two (2) bedrooms, three (3) bathrooms, combined kitchen and living room, dining room, study, laundry and attached single garage. Proposed materials include concrete block walls, galvanised iron gladding, Weathertex and Hardiplank cladding, Colorbond roofing, timber framed windows on the front/southern façade, powder-coated aluminium windows on other elevations, tilt panel garage door with glazed top-lights, and Colorbond and palisade fencing.

The existing olive tree in the rear garden will need to be removed to facilitate the development. New landscaping is proposed along both sides of the new access handle for the battleaxe lot.

PROCEDURE AND BACKGROUND

Original Application

The original application involved a three lot subdivision (new battleaxe lot and subdivision of existing duplex) and a new two storey four (4) bedroom house. Shortly after lodgement the application was amended to carry out the subdivision in two stages.

Following an initial review carried out by Council staff and the first exhibition period of the application where two (2) submissions were received, concerns were raised in regards to visual privacy, visual bulk, overshadowing of neighbouring properties, inappropriate visual appearance, heritage impacts, and insufficient areas of private open space, landscaping and vehicle manoeuvring.

Amendments

The applicant worked with Council to address these issues and amended the design of the new dwelling and landscaping on the site. Namely, the bulk of the second storey was significantly reduced by utilising a different roof form, and proposed landscaping species were revised. The amended proposal was re-exhibited and four (4) submissions were received raising similar concerns to the original exhibition period.

Following an assessment of the amended application, the applicant sought to further amend the design of the new dwelling to address concerns raised in the additional submissions. Namely, the new dwelling has been reduced to single storey height, two (2) bedrooms and a single garage. Proposed landscaping between the new dwelling and southern boundary has been deleted. This further amendment was re-exhibited, and one (1) submission was received. Submissions from each of the exhibition periods are addressed in detail later in this report.

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 1.7 - Application of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994

Section 4.15

Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s4.15(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a) to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(e) to provide a range of housing choices in planned urban and rural locations to meet population growth,

(f) to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be generally consistent with the foregoing aims insofar as it will contribute to housing choices in proximity to the Orange CBD without detracting from the unique character, heritage and environmental characteristics of Orange.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.7 - Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned R1 General Residential
Lot Size Map:	No Minimum Lot Size
Heritage Map:	Located in a conservation area, and near listed buildings
Height of Buildings Map:	No building height limit
Floor Space Ratio Map:	No floor space limit
Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:	No biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater vulnerable
Drinking Water Catchment Map:	Not within the drinking water catchment
Watercourse Map:	Not within or affecting a defined watercourse
Urban Release Area Map:	Not within an urban release area
Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area

The mapped matters of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

· covenants imposed or required by Council

· prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

· any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

· any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

· any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

· any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

· any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones

The subject site is located within the R1 General Residential Zone. The proposed development is defined as ‘subdivision’ and ‘dwelling house’ under the LEP.

Pursuant to Section 4B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act subdivision of land means:

the division of land into two or more parts that, after the division, would be obviously adapted for separate occupation, use or disposition.

Pursuant to the dictionary contained within the LEP, a dwelling house means:

a building containing only one dwelling.

To extend the above definition further, the LEP defines a dwelling to mean:

a room or suite of rooms occupied or used or so constructed or adapted as to be capable of being occupied or used as a separate domicile.

Subdivision, demolition (tree removal), and dwelling houses are permissible in the R1 zone with the consent of Council.

Clause 2.3 - Zone Objectives

Clause 2.3 of LEP 2011 references the Land Use Table and Objectives for each zone in LEP 2011. These objectives for land zoned R1 General Residential are as follows:

· to provide for the housing needs of the community

· to provide for a variety of housing types and densities

· to enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents

· to ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement

· to ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access.

The proposed development is consistent with these zone objectives as follows:

- provides additional housing stock within the City;

- provides a variation of housing type and density for the City;

- the subject site is within close proximity to routes used by public transport, and to the CBD, shops and services; and

- the subject site is not in proximity to the Southern Link Road.

Clause 2.6 - Subdivision - Consent Requirements

Clause 2.6 requires development consent for the subdivision of land. This application seeks consent for the subdivision of the subject land.

Clause 2.7 - Demolition Requires Development Consent

This clause triggers the need for development consent in relation to a building or work. This requirement does not apply to any demolition that is defined as exempt development.

The proposal involves demolition and the applicant is seeking the consent of Council. The extent of the demolition relates to the removal of one olive tree at the rear of the site to facilitate further development on the land. Whilst the removal of the tree will change the immediate environment the tree removal will have no significant impact on adjoining lands, the streetscape, or public realm. Relevant conditions of consent are attached.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

Clause 4.1 - Minimum Subdivision Lot Size

This clause requires the subdivision of land to be equal to or greater than the size nominated for the land under the Minimum Lot Size Map. In relation to this site, the LEP maps do not nominate a minimum lot size, therefore this clause does not apply to this application. An assessment of the proposed subdivision is carried out in the DCP assessment later in this report.

Clause 4.1B - Minimum Lot Sizes for Dual Occupancy, Multi Dwelling Housing and Residential Flat Buildings

This clause sets out a minimum lot size of 1,250m² for multi dwelling housing (three or more dwellings on a lot) in the R1 zone. The subject land measures 832.9m², which is below this minimum. Notwithstanding this, although the proposal will result in a total of three dwellings on the land, the application is not technically considered ‘multi dwelling housing’, as each dwelling will be on its own lot as ‘single dwellings’. The proposed staging involves:

- subdivision of the existing land into two Torrens lots, where there is no minimum lot size in this area as set out in Clause 4.1 above;

- construction of a single dwelling house on the new rear battleaxe lot; and

- subdivision of the existing duplex onto their own lots, resulting in a single dwelling on each lot (two lot Torrens with party wall).

Due to the proposal staging, the minimum requirement set out in this clause does not apply to this application.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

5.10 - Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10 seeks to conserve the environmental heritage of Orange, and the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas.

It states in part:

(4) Effect of Proposed Development on Heritage Significance

The subject property is located within the Central Orange Heritage Conservation Area, nearly adjacent to listed dwelling at 79 March Street and near to a listed restaurant and listed dwellings at 85 March and 115 Hill Streets (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 - plan of nearby heritage items (in beige hashing)

The Orange City Council Heritage Inventory describes the significance of these listed buildings as follows:

‘Trebanog House’ dwelling (Former Inn) – 79-81 March Street: “The masonry building with Ashlar moulding, hipped iron roof, brick chimneys and timber verandah with cast iron brackets is one of the earliest intact Inns, complements the streetscape and contributes to the Conservation Area as a heritage item”.

‘1870 Restaurant’ (Former Inn) – 85-87 March Street: “The masonry rendered Inn dates from 1870 and is one of the earliest intact licensed premises and retains the original character, complementing the streetscape and contributing to the Conservation Area as a heritage item”. Previously known as Welcome Inn, Harrisons, Patmos, French Restaurants, and originally the Welcome Inn/Family Hotel.

‘Vincent’ dwelling – 115 Hill Street: “The unusual and rare Colonial styled residence complements the streetscape and contributes to the Conservation Area as a Heritage item”.

It is noted that these listed properties are not subject to Heritage Management Plans, and the proposal does not warrant the preparation of such a Plan in this case.

The subject site is off a laneway where the predominant buildings are single storey residential houses, with the setting including a range of substantial mature trees. The existing building comprises a traditional pair of attached cottages which retain their traditional character, with distinctive elements including the pitched roof with rear skillion, front verandah and painted rendered facade with detailing to the doors and windows. Generally there are buildings in the streetscape of a wide range of periods and styles. The subdivision pattern illustrates a range of buildings erected to address the lane, although despite rear garages, there are no apparent subdivisions of these earlier lots off the lane.

The application and amendments were referred to Council’s Heritage and Urban Design Advisor, and the following comments were made (summarised):

- The amended design has made a serious attempt to fit the form of the new dwelling within the building envelope, to use traditional materials, and model the bulk and scale;

- Views of the dwelling would be those from down the driveway to the garage when viewed from the lane and from the adjoining properties;

- The removal of the substantial mature tree is a major loss. Supplementary planting is shown on the submitted Landscape Plan and advice has been obtained from a professional landscape architect, but only relates to linear planting;

- The proposed siting of the new dwelling has minimal impact upon the existing pair of cottages, provided their private outdoor open space is sufficient and compliant;

- The proposed siting of the new dwelling is consistent with other early examples of stable type buildings to the rear of houses in the Conservation Area;

- The property at 77 March Street has been similarly subdivided, with a large house at 77A backing on to the subject site;

- The visual impact of the standard roller door is not appropriate given the size and prominence (original design – this has been amended to meet recommendations);

- Minimal setbacks are noted to the three sides;

- While planting is shown on the plans, this requires verification that it is appropriate and will endure;

- The range of materials is broad, and the use of concrete blocks is not consistent with the general character of the area. A painted render to complement the finish on the cottages would be more sympathetic, while the steel and fibre-cement boards are appropriate. No colours are indicated, and will be required; and

- The verandah and full height doors and windows to the front elevation give an appropriate scale and character.

With these comments in mind, the following recommendations have been made:

- Fielders traditional custom orb galvanised steel (iron) cladding run horizontally;

- Weathertex classic smooth 200mm boards in Dulux Dune (and shown on drawings);

- Windspray custom orb Colorbond roofing, traditional rolled flashings, smooth half round gutters and circular downpipes (and shown on drawings);

- Timber verandah posts in Cabots Jarrah stain;

- All windows and doors to the front elevation to be clear finished timber;

- Tilt panel garage door with glazed toplights; and

- A revised Landscape Plan specifying numbers and species types, including deep rooted trees with mature height to mitigate the loss of the large olive tree.

The amended plans demonstrate that the dwelling with attached garage is appropriately sited within the land and heritage setting. Council’s Heritage Advisor’s recommendations in regards to detailing, materials, colours and landscaping are supported by Council staff. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the exterior of the existing duplex addressing the street. The majority of the proposed new dwelling will not be easily observed from the laneway, as discussed above.

Clause 5.10 also requires consent for tree removal in a heritage conservation area. The applicant has supplied an arboriculture report supporting the removal of the existing tree, and a letter from a landscape architect recommending appropriate planting species on the site. The report states that following in regards to the tree to be removed:

- The Olive tree (Olea europaea) is 8-10m tall;

- The tree has two large basal wounds which have allowed rot to enter the trunk and compromise the stability of the trunk, and may lead to whole tree failure;

- Elsewhere in the canopy are abscission scars where branches have failed, and previous pruning practices have led to cavities from the main fork which could meet up with the basal wounds and cause serious piping in the heartwood, further affecting stability;

- The fruit produced by the tree attracts feral Mynah birds, which are a major urban nuisance and negatively impact on biodiversity; and

- The evergreen tree overshadows neighbouring properties to the south and was planted too close to the boundary fence.

Council’s Manager City Presentation has reviewed the proposal and makes the following comments:

“I have undertaken an inspection of the subject tree and concur with the Arborists report; there is a significant amount of decay in the root crown / lower trunk and whilst African Olives trees with solid timber and compartmentalise soundly the decay between roots and stem warrant approval for the tree to be removed”.

In regards to the proposed landscaping plan, concerns have been raised by Council’s Manager City Presentation and Heritage Advisor, as well as from neighbouring residents, as to the species proposed and their siting. In particular, the landscape architect’s recommendations only relate to linear plantings and do not specifically account for the heritage setting. Previously there was doubt around whether there was sufficient planting width between the new dwelling and southern boundary for species to survive due to lack of space and daylight, however the applicant has removed this element from the proposal, which is discussed in greater detail later in this report.

In an ideal situation at least one mature tree should be provided in each of the private open space areas. However, given the availability of space on the site and the north-south orientation of the existing dwellings and gardens, there is a need to balance amenity provided by plantings with the provision of daylighting to windows and open space. It is considered impractical to provide three mature trees in this case, and from the point of view of mitigating heritage impacts, the loss of the large olive tree could be replaced by one large or two smaller trees. Relevant conditions of consent are recommended to this effect.

Overall, conditions of consent are recommended in relation to detailing for the new dwelling and landscaping, where further amendments can be assessed and approved prior to subdivision and construction. Subject to these recommendations, it is considered that the proposed development will not detract from the significance of the conservation area and nearby listed buildings, and is consistent with Clause 5.10 of the LEP.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

Not relevant to the application. The subject site is not located in an Urban Release Area.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.1 - Earthworks

This clause establishes a range of matters that must be considered prior to granting development consent for any application involving earthworks, such as:

(a) the likely disruption of, or any detrimental effect on, existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development

(b) the effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

(c) the quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both

(d) the effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining properties

(e) the source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material

(f) the likelihood of disturbing relics

(g) the proximity to and potential for adverse impacts on any waterway, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area

(h) any measures proposed to minimise or mitigate the impacts referred to in paragraph (g).

The earthworks proposed in the application are limited to the extent of cutting and filling required for the proposed dwelling and removal of the tree. The extent of disruption to the drainage of the site is considered to be minor and is unlikely to detrimentally affect adjoining properties or receiving waterways. The extent of the earthworks will not materially affect the potential future use or redevelopment of the site that may occur at the end of the proposed development's lifespan.

The site is not known to be contaminated. The site is not known to contain any Aboriginal, European or archaeological relics. Previous known uses of the site do not suggest that any relics are likely to be uncovered. The site is not in proximity to any waterway, drinking water catchment or sensitive area. Conditions requiring a sediment control plan, including silt traps and other protective measures, to ensure that loose dirt and sediment do not escape the site boundaries are recommended.

7.3 - Stormwater Management

This clause applies to all industrial, commercial and residential zones and requires that Council be satisfied that the proposal:

(a) is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting onsite infiltration of water

(b) includes, where practical, onsite stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, groundwater or river water; and

Council’s Development Engineer has recommended that a condition of consent be applied requiring that the development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater detention within the development designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of a lower frequency without damage to downstream developments. Subject to suitable design, stormwater can be appropriately managed onsite in accordance with the LEP provisions.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

(b) the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

Furthermore consent may not be granted unless Council is satisfied that:

(a) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

(b) if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

(c) if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.

The proposal is not anticipated to involve the discharge of toxic or noxious substances and is therefore unlikely to contaminate the groundwater or related ecosystems. The proposal does not involve extraction of groundwater and will therefore not contribute to groundwater depletion. The design and siting of the proposal avoids impacts on groundwater and is therefore considered acceptable.

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies and states:

(a) the supply of water,

(b) the supply of electricity,

(c) the disposal and management of sewage,

(d) storm water drainage or on-site conservation,

(e) suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available, or can be made available to the land and are adequate for the proposal. Relevant conditions of consent are attached in regards to servicing and utilities.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 applies to the subject development. The applicant has submitted a BASIX certificate in support of the development which demonstrates that the proposed new dwelling complies with the State Government water and thermal efficiency targets. The application is consistent with the SEPP.

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) is applicable. Pursuant to Clause 7 - Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application:

(1) A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a) it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

Given that the subject property is currently used for residential purposes and is located within a long established residential neighbourhood, it is unlikely that the uses of the land would have resulted in it being in a contaminated state unsuitable for ongoing residential use.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION 4.15(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s4.15(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land. An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant Planning Outcomes will be undertaken below.

CHAPTER 3 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Section 3.1 - Cumulative Impacts

“Cumulative Impacts” identifies that Council will consider not only the direct impacts of a particular development, but also whether the development, when carried out in conjunction with other development in the locality, has a more significant environmental impact. Notably, this section identifies that residential units should be located and designed in a way that fits in with the predominant low-density character of the City’s residential area.

Specific planning outcomes for cumulative impacts include:

· applications for development demonstrate how the development relates to the character and use of land in the vicinity

· the introduction of new development into a locality maintains environmental impacts within existing or community-accepted levels

· water conservation measures are implemented.

The relevant matters are generally addressed under ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ below and elsewhere throughout this report.

Based on that assessment it is considered that the proposed development, subject to minor detailing, materials, and landscaping changes, adequately relates to the existing character and land use in the area, and would maintain environmental impacts within existing community accepted levels. Although it is acknowledged that further infill development in close proximity to the City centre is likely and will increase the density of the area, the provisions of the LEP and DCP allow for and encourage this future growth, subject to meeting various standards and guidelines. The proposed development meets those guidelines.

CHAPTER 7 - DEVELOPMENT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS

Section 7.2 - Residential Subdivision

The DCP sets out the following relevant planning outcomes for urban residential subdivision:

· Lots are orientated to optimise energy efficiency principles.

The proposed new dwelling has been designed to incorporate primary living areas and the area of private open space on the northern side to optimise solar access. The proposed dwelling also achieves BASIX requirements as discussed elsewhere in this report. The existing duplex has the private open space areas to the south, however this is an existing situation. This is discussed in greater detail in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ below.

· Lots below 350m² indicate existing or planned house layouts, which identify how privacy, solar access, vehicular access and private open-space needs are to be achieved.

The applicant seeks consent for the construction of the new dwelling along with the staged subdivision, and as such the application sets out the intended site layout, existing and proposed dwelling footprints, private open space areas, parking, manoeuvring, shadow diagrams etc. It is considered that appropriate solar access, privacy, vehicle access and private open space outcomes can be achieved, and these aspects are assessed in detail in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ below.

· Lots are fully serviced and have direct frontage/access to a public road.

All services have the capacity to be extended to the proposed development, and relevant conditions of consent are attached. Each proposed lot would have direct access to Rosemary Lane.

· Design and construction complies with the Orange Development and Subdivision Code.

Council’s Development Engineer has recommended a condition of consent stating that the provisions and requirements of the Orange Development and Subdivision Code apply to the proposal.

· Battleaxe lots provide an adequate accessway width for the number of dwellings proposed to be served in order to allow for vehicle and pedestrian access and location of services.

Expanding on this outcome, DCP Section 7.2 sets out guidelines for battleaxe lots as follows:

- sufficient size and shape to permit a house and driveway positioned in a way that allows cars to turn around within the lot;

- accessway needs to be wide enough to allow for vehicular access and services such as power, telecommunications, water, and possibly drainage and internal sewer (3m wide driveway within an access corridor of 4.5m is deemed adequate);

- should have a minimum area of 650m², excluding the area of the accessway;

- be designed to provide for solar access and privacy; and

- where practicable, should adjoin open space.

Submitted plans demonstrate that the minimum driveway width can be met and is considered adequate for this proposal. Turn circles have also been provided which demonstrate compliance with the relevant standards. It is noted that the original proposal included an attached double garage for the new dwelling with extremely tight manoeuvring. Ideally a smaller footprint for the new dwelling would achieve greater manoeuvring space on the proposed lot, thus resulting in a better development. However, instead of this the applicant has changed the garage to a single garage, which is adequate for a two bedroom dwelling as discussed later in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’.

A condition of consent is recommended to ensure that vehicles enter and leave the battleaxe site in a forward gear to ensure safe egress as well as pedestrian safety.

The proposed development involves a two stage subdivision which will ultimately create three residential lots of 197.3m², 208.7m² and 426.9m²in size. The largest lot comprises the battleaxe lot, and this area includes the access handle. While the proposed battleaxe lot is substantially smaller than the recommended 650m² and does not adjoin public open space, the DCP guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes, and acknowledges that there can be other solutions to meeting the planning outcomes where each design shall be considered on its merit.

The intention of the minimum 650m² guideline is to ensure that adequate residential amenity can be provided while not adversely impacting on neighbouring amenity, as well as providing adequate servicing to the site. The applicant has demonstrated that adequate access, servicing, solar access, privacy and amenity can be provided to the existing, proposed and neighbouring dwellings in accordance with the DCP. These matters are addressed in detail in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ below, which demonstrates that all relevant outcomes can be achieved. On balance, the planning outcomes for urban residential subdivision can be met, therefore the proposed subdivision can be supported in this case.

Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development

Section 7.7 sets out objectives and planning outcomes for residential development design elements. The overall objectives as well as the specific planning outcomes are relevant and are addressed in detail below.

Streetscape Objectives

· to ensure that the development fits into its setting and environmental features of the locality

· to ensure that the appearance of housing is of a high visual quality, enhances the streetscape and complements good quality surrounding development

· to ensure that new development complements places with heritage significance and their settings in a contemporary way

· to develop a sense of place with attractive street frontages

· to encourage visually appealing cohesive streetscapes

· to create a safe and secure environment

· to provide consistent design elements that protect private investment.

The proposal meets the DCP streetscape objectives, as discussed below.

Neighbourhood Character

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Neighbourhood Character:

· site layout and building design enables the:

- creation of attractive residential environments with clear character and identity

- use of site features such as views, aspect, existing vegetation and landmarks

· buildings are designed to complement the relevant features and built form that are identified as part of the desired neighbourhood character

· the streetscape is designed to encourage pedestrian access and use.

The character and identity of a development are influenced by building design that maintains a common theme and consistent use of materials. The existing duplex fronting the street will remain unchanged, and as such streetscape appearance will remain largely intact. The proposed new dwelling to the rear of the site needs to be complementary to the surrounding pattern of development and buildings. The subject site is off a laneway where the predominant buildings are single storey residential houses in a wide range of periods and styles, and substantial mature trees. The subdivision pattern illustrates a range of buildings erected to address the lane, and the addition of rear garages and sheds in a range of styles and sizes. Infill development is not common in the immediate surrounds, although the site directly adjacent to the south (77 and 77A March Street) was subdivided into a battleaxe site with new dwelling (see Figure 3). There are no apparent subdivisions of the earlier lots off the lane.

Figure 3 - aerial photograph of subject site (in red) and surrounding pattern of development on Rosemary Lane (centre - horizontal), Prince Street (top),

March Street (bottom), Clinton Street (left), and Hill Street (right)

Whilst the scale of the proposed lots is smaller than typical residential development in the area, the LEP and DCP encourage a range of housing types and infill development, particularly in close proximity to the City centre. When assessing neighbourhood character, both the existing character and the intended future character of an area needs to be taken into account. Based on the LEP zoning of the land and no minimum lot sizes for the area, as well as population trends and forecasts for Orange, it is expected that the future neighbourhood character will include additional smaller lots and infill development as the need for smaller dwellings in close proximity to the centre of Orange increases, thereby increasing the density of housing, people and traffic in this area.

As discussed in the LEP Heritage assessment earlier in this report, the building design of the proposed new dwelling requires minor changes in regards to detailing, materials, colours, landscaping etc. These recommended changes will ensure that the proposal fits within the locality and streetscape, has a quality visual appearance, does not impact on surrounding heritage values, and better complements the existing and future neighbourhood character. Amended landscaping will provide for integration of the dwellings into the established streetscape, improve the visual impact of hardstand areas and mitigate the impacts of the tree removal.

Subject to these minor changes, it is considered that the proposal will complement the surrounding pattern of development and will provide for a continuation of residential land use. Overall, the proposed development will comply with the DCP outcomes for neighbourhood character.

Building Appearance

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Building Appearance:

· the building design, detailing and finishes relate to the desired neighbourhood character, complement the residential scale of the area, and add visual interest to the street

· the frontages of buildings and their entries face the street

· garages and car parks are sited and designed so that they do not dominate the street frontage.

Subject to the recommended changes discussed above and in the LEP Heritage assessment, the external finishes, materials and colours will be appropriate for this neighbourhood. The building design and detailing will complement historical dwellings and more recently established dwellings in this locality. It is noted that the proposed new dwelling, whilst complementing the existing dwellings in the area, will be largely obscured from view from the lane, behind the existing duplex and new landscaping. The development is therefore consistent with the planning outcomes relating to building appearance.

Heritage

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Heritage:

· heritage buildings and structures are efficiently re-used

· new development complements and enhances the significance of a heritage item or place of heritage significance listed in the Orange Heritage Study

· significant landscape features are retained including original period fences and period gardens.

Heritage considerations have previously been addressed under the LEP considerations, where it was concluded that subject to conditions of consent regarding landscaping, materials, colours and detailing, the proposal is acceptable. The heritage outcomes of the DCP have thus been met.

Setbacks

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Setbacks:

· street setbacks contribute to the desired neighbourhood character, assist with the integration of new development and make efficient use of the site

· street setbacks create an appropriate scale for the street considering all other streetscape components.

Existing front setbacks from Rosemary Lane will not be altered.

Front Fences and Walls

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Fences and Walls:

· Front fences and walls:

- assist in highlighting entrances and creating a sense of identity within the streetscape

- are constructed of materials compatible with associated housing and with fences visible from the site that positively contribute to the streetscape

- provide for facilities in the street frontage area such as mail boxes.

No changes are proposed to the frontage of the existing site, with the exception of a new driveway to the proposed battleaxe site, which includes new fencing and landscaping. It is acknowledged that the addition of the new driveway/access handle has the effect of interrupting the rhythm of front fences and single driveways within the street. However, this type of development is recognised as an efficient use of residential land, and it is difficult to provide for infill development that that does not result in some level of change to the established streetscape.

Notwithstanding this, the extent of the change is not unreasonable, and the scale and form of the proposed fencing and landscaping is appropriate in the frontage (ie 1m high and set back to ensure sightlines for vehicles coming in and out of driveways). There is sufficient space for an additional mail box at the frontage. General fencing and landscaping of the site are discussed in more detail later in this report. Overall, the outcomes for front fences and walls have been achieved.

Bulk and Scale Objectives

· To allow flexibility in siting buildings and to ensure that the bulk and scale of new development reasonably protects the amenity of neighbouring properties and maintains appropriate neighbourhood character.

· To allow adequate daylight, sunlight and ventilation to living areas and private open spaces of new and neighbouring developments.

· To encourage the sharing of views, while considering the reasonable development of the site.

The development in not inconsistent with the above objectives as detailed below.

Visual Bulk

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Visual Bulk:

· Built form accords with the desired neighbourhood character of the area with:

- side and rear setbacks progressively increased to reduce bulk and overshadowing

- site coverage that retains the relatively low density landscaped character of residential areas

- building form and siting that relates to landform, with minimal land shaping (cut and fill)

- building height at the street frontage that maintains a comparable scale with the predominant adjacent development form

- building to the boundary where appropriate.

The DCP requires dwellings to be contained within the prescribed envelopes generated by planes projected at 45^o over the site commencing 2.5m above existing ground level from each side and rear boundary.

In its original form the proposed dwelling had a second storey with an attic style roof with dormer windows, which was considered unreasonably large and visually dominant, despite meeting the numerical guidelines set out by the DCP. Landscaping was provided along the southern boundary in an attempt to screen the bulk, however concerns were raised about the ability for vegetation to grow given the lack of daylight (southern orientation) and lack of width, therefore it would be unlikely to mitigate impacts. Neighbours were also concerned that the proposed landscaping could cause further impacts such as over-shadowing, and an inability to maintain the plantings due to lack of access. Council’s Manager City Presentation concurred with these concerns, and this was feedback to the applicant.

In response to these concerns the applicant amended the proposal, where the second storey element was significantly reduced in bulk, with a Dutch-gable form set well back from the edges of the ground floor below it and from the site boundaries. While that amendment rendered the dwelling more appropriate in scale and bulk compared with neighbouring properties and surrounding development, neighbours were still concerned about visual impacts and potential impacts of the southern vegetation.

The applicant, in response to these reiterated objections, has further amended the proposal by removing the second storey entirely, as well as the landscaping along the southern boundary. The submitted drawings demonstrate that the development will be contained within these planes. This amendment is considered to be acceptable in scale and form in regards to visual bulk and neighbourhood character; and given this, it is considered that landscaping for screening is no longer necessary.

Site coverage is also a consideration of visual bulk, where the DCP indicates that 60% site coverage for single dwellings and their outbuildings is appropriate. The table below sets out that the proposed site coverage meets this requirement:

Dwelling	Footprint	Site Area	Site Coverage
Proposed dwelling and garage – proposed Lot 200	172.43m²	426.9m²	40.4%
Existing duplex and carport – proposed Lot 201	90m²	197.3m²	45.6%
Existing duplex and carport – proposed Lot 202	95.3m²	208.7m²	45.7%

Overall, the amended proposal meets the planning outcomes in regards to visual bulk.

Walls and Boundaries

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Walls and Boundaries:

· Building to the boundary is undertaken to provide for efficient use of the site taking into account:

- the privacy of neighbouring dwellings and private open space

- the access to daylight reaching adjoining properties

- the impact of boundary walls on neighbours.

The proposed dwelling is reasonably sited given the constraints of the site. Although situated near to the southern boundary, a reasonable level of solar access can be provided to the adjacent southern neighbour’s north facing living areas and private open space area as discussed below. In respect to the neighbour’s daylighting and privacy, compliance can be achieved, and these aspects are discussed in detail below. Overall the wall and boundary outcomes have been achieved.

Daylight and Sunlight

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Daylight and Sunlight:

· Buildings are sited and designed to ensure:

- daylight to habitable rooms in adjacent dwellings is not significantly reduced

- overshadowing of neighbouring secluded open spaces or main living area windows is not significantly increased

- consideration of Council’s Energy Efficiency Code.

Shadow diagrams were prepared in support of the original second storey proposal, and Council officer calculations demonstrated that compliance could be achieved. It is noted that revised diagrams have not been provided based on the amended single storey design, however given a larger and bulkier design could comply, the single storey design will also comply. In consideration of the DCP Guidelines, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory as outlined below.

Overshadowing of Dwellings/Habitable Rooms

According to the DCP Guidelines and Council’s Energy Efficiency Code, sunlight to at least 75% of north facing living area windows within the development and on adjoining land is to be provided for a minimum of four hours on 21 June; or not further reduced than existing where already less. Habitable rooms should also include windows that are facing private open space, courtyard, verandah, patio etc, or are open to the sky and are at least 1.8 metres from any adjoining building.

The proposed dwelling and all neighbouring dwellings will receive the required solar access to north facing windows. Habitable windows generally face areas of open space or the front verandah, and are more than 1.8m from other dwellings. The existing duplexes do not receive adequate daylight due to their layout and orientation, however this is an existing situation, and the proposal does not further reduce their solar access.

Overshadowing of Private Open Space

According to the DCP Guidelines and Council’s Energy Smart Homes Code, sunlight is to be available to at least 40% of required open space for dwellings within the development and on neighbouring properties for at least three hours between 9am and 3pm.

Based on the submitted documentation and calculations carried out by Council staff (some of the submitted diagrams and calculations were incorrect - where overshadowing was worse than shown at 9am, but areas receiving sufficient daylight between 11am and 3pm were slightly better than stated), compliance can be achieved as follows:

- the revised and reduced private open space area for the existing duplex on proposed Lot 201 will be located to the south and east of the existing dwelling, and will achieve a minimum of three hours of winter daylight between 10am and 1pm;

- the revised and reduced private open space area for the existing duplex on proposed Lot 202 will be located to the south and east of the existing dwelling, and will achieve a minimum of three hours of winter daylight between 11am and 2pm;

- the proposed area of open space for the proposed new dwelling on Lot 200 will be located to the north of the dwelling, and will achieve a minimum of four hours of winter daylight between 10am and 2pm;

- the existing area of open space immediately to the south at number 77A March Street will receive a minimum of four hours of winter sun between 11am and 3pm; and

- the existing area of open space and vegetable garden to the southwest at number 73 March Street will receive a minimum of four hours of winter sun between 11am and 3pm.

Overall, the proposed development meets the daylight and sunlight outcomes.

Views

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Views:

· building form and design allow for residents from adjacent properties to share prominent views where possible

· views including vistas of heritage items or landmarks are not substantially affected by the bulk and scale of the new development.

The subject site is not within an important view corridor. The proposed dwelling is located to the rear of the existing site and is moderate in scale and height, therefore will not unreasonably diminish view corridors of and within the streetscape. View outcomes are therefore achieved.

Privacy and Security Objective

· To ensure that the siting and design of buildings provide privacy for residents and neighbours in their dwellings and principal private open space.

The development is not inconsistent with the above objective as detailed below.

Visual Privacy

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Visual Privacy:

· Direct overlooking of principal living areas and private open spaces of other dwellings is minimised firstly by:

- building siting and layout

- location of windows and balconies

and secondly by:

- design of windows or use of screening devices and landscaping.

There is limited ability for the ground floor levels of dwellings to overlook internal living areas or private open space of an adjoining dwellings due to the reasonably level site and the provision of 1.8m high boundary fencing. The second storey has been deleted from the proposal, therefore eliminating the potential to overlook adjoining properties. Overall the development is appropriately designed and sited so as to not result in any adverse visual privacy related impacts, and the privacy outcomes can be achieved.

Acoustic Privacy

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Acoustic Privacy:

· Site layout and building design:

- protect habitable rooms from excessively high levels of external noise

- minimise the entry of external noise to private open space for dwellings close to major noise sources

- minimise transmission of sound through a building to affect other dwellings.

In consideration of the DCP Guidelines the proposal is considered to be satisfactory. The site is located in an area where ambient noise levels are expected to be low due to the predominant residential land use pattern. The dwellings are detached, thus limiting the potential for sound penetration between them.

It is considered that acoustic privacy outcomes have been achieved.

Security

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Security:

· the site layout enhances personal safety and minimises the potential for crime, vandalism and fear

· the design of dwellings enables residents to survey streets, communal areas and approaches to dwelling entrances.

The design of the dwelling and site layout is appropriate to maintain safety and minimise the potential for crime, vandalism, and fear for residents. Some habitable room windows will address the internal access handle, thereby providing opportunities for natural surveillance. The proposed landscaping and fencing will not restrict sightlines to public areas, and will provide territorial reinforcement and delineate public and private spaces. Security outcomes have therefore been achieved.

Site Access and Circulation Objectives

· To provide convenient and safe access and parking that meets the needs of all residents and visitors.

· To encourage the integrated design of access and parking facilities to minimise visual and environmental impacts.

The development is not inconsistent with the above objectives as detailed below.

Circulation and Design

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Circulation and Design:

· accessways and parking areas are designed to manage stormwater

· accessways, driveways and open parking areas are suitably landscaped to enhance amenity while providing security and accessibility to residents and visitors

· the site layout allows people with a disability to travel to and within the site between car parks, buildings and communal open space.

The existing dwellings will retain their direct street frontage to Rosemary Lane. A new separate access will be provided to the proposed rear lot via a new vehicle crossing and driveway. Reverse egress will continue for the existing dwellings, consistent with vehicle manoeuvring arrangements for single dwellings throughout the City.

Initially neighbours raised issues with very tight manoeuvring areas to and from the new attached double garage, which although compliant with the relevant standards, would have been very tight. The applicant has amended the proposal to a single garage with the same amount of manoeuvring space in the garage and driveway.

Council’s Technical Services Division has reviewed the proposed new garage and vehicle circulation of the manoeuvring area and access and found it to be adequate. The turn paths and widths meet the relevant Australian Standards, and as such vehicles will be able to enter and leave the proposed battleaxe site in a forward gear as required by the DCP and Council’s Development and Subdivision Code. A condition of consent is recommended to this effect.

Internal access is proposed between the new garage and dwelling. Landscaping and stormwater are discussed below.

Overall, site circulation and design outcomes have been achieved.

Car Parking

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Car Parking:

· Parking facilities are provided, designed and located to:

- enable the efficient and convenient use of car spaces and accessways within the site

- reduce the visual dominance of car parking areas and accessways.

· Car parking is provided with regard to the:

- the number and size of proposed dwellings

- requirements of people with limited mobility or disabilities.

According to the car parking table in the DCP, the development generates a parking requirement of 3 off-street spaces, based on a minimum of 1 space (but preferably 2 spaces) for each dwelling house. The submitted plans show provision for three (3) off-street parking spaces in the form of one carport for each of the existing attached dwellings and a single attached garage for the proposed new dwelling.

Neighbours have objected on the basis that car parking should be provided based on the residential unit and dual occupancy rates, which calculates demand depending on bedroom numbers and provides visitor parking. However, the proposed development seeks consent for three individual dwelling houses, each on their own Torrens lot, therefore the ‘dwelling house’ rate applies.

While it is acknowledged that the lane is narrow and cannot easily accommodate visitor parking on the street, this is the same situation for most existing dwellings in the street, which do not provide for visitor parking either. The proposed arrangement is considered reasonable in this case, being only one additional two bedroom dwelling.

Overall the proposal is considered to be satisfactory, meets the DCP provisions, and thus meets the above parking outcomes.

Open Space and Landscaping

Private Open Space

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Private Open Space:

· private open space is clearly defined for private use

· private open space areas are of a size, shape and slope to suit the reasonable requirements of residents including some outdoor recreational needs and service functions

· private open space is:

- capable of being an extension of the dwelling for outdoor living, entertainment and recreation

- accessible from a living area of the dwelling

- located to take advantage of outlooks; and to reduce adverse impacts of overshadowing or privacy from adjoining buildings

- orientated to optimise year round use.

The following table demonstrates that each of the dwellings is provided with open space that complies with the minimum requirement in terms of area:

Dwelling	Living Area (excluding garage, verandah, etc)	Private Open Space Required by DCP	Private Open Space Provided
Proposed dwelling– proposed Lot 200	85.5m²	42.75m²	61m²
Existing duplex – proposed Lot 201	66.9m²	33.5m²	68.3m²
Existing duplex– proposed Lot 202	74.3m²	37.2m²	77m²

All private open space is provided behind the front building line, is readily accessed from living room spaces, and will each have a minimum dimension of 3m. The yards for proposed Lots 200 and 202 are able to provide an area of at least 5m x 5m with sufficient solar access as discussed above.

Proposed Lot 201 however, cannot quite contain a 5m x 5m due to the need to cut off the corner to use for vehicle manoeuvring for proposed Lot 200 (the new dwelling). This area is proposed at 5m north-south, and between 3m and 5.98m east-west, meaning the non‑compliance within the garden area is very minor. It is considered that the space has sufficient overall area, is private and functional, will meet the needs of residents and has sufficient solar access as discussed earlier. Despite the numerical non-compliance with the guideline, the proposal meets the planning outcomes for private open space listed above.

Overall, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the private open space outcomes of the DCP.

Open Space and Landscaping

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Open Space and Landscaping:

· the site layout provides open space and landscaped areas which:

- contribute to the character of the development by providing buildings in a landscaped setting

- provide for a range of uses and activities including stormwater management

- allow cost effective management.

· the landscape design specifies landscape themes consistent with the desired neighbourhood character; vegetation types and location, paving and lighting provided for access and security

· major existing trees are retained and protected in a viable condition whenever practicable through appropriate siting of buildings, accessways and parking areas

· paving is applied sparingly and integrated in the landscape design.

The original landscaping plan submitted in support of the proposal has been amended to delete the landscaping along the southern boundary as discussed in the ‘Visual Bulk’ section of this report. A letter from a landscape architect recommending appropriate species for the site has also been provided.

As discussed in the LEP Heritage section of this report, Council’s Heritage Advisor and Manager City Presentation recommend additional planting in the form of deep rooted trees to suitably replace the large tree to be removed, and mitigate visual impacts of the new dwelling and additional hard standing areas. It is considered impractical to have so many trees in such a small space, and this would impact on the availability of outdoor space and daylighting to windows. As such, as previously discussed one large or two small trees are considered sufficient to replace the existing tree to be removed. A condition of consent is therefore recommended for an amended landscaping plan with suitable replacement plantings to be prepared by a qualified landscape architect to this effect, to be submitted to Council for further assessment.

Subject to minor amendments, the proposal will include species that are considered to be suitable to the Orange climate and suitable to the site. Overall, the development will be consistent with the landscaping planning outcomes.

Water and Soil Management Objectives

· To control and minimise the impact of stormwater run-off and soil erosion on adjoining land and downstream.

· To encourage reduced water wastage by reusing, recycling and harvesting stormwater.

The development is not inconsistent with the above objectives as detailed below.

Stormwater

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Stormwater:

· onsite drainage systems are designed to consider:

- downstream capacity and need for onsite retention, detention and re-use

- scope for onsite infiltration of water

- safety and convenience of pedestrians and vehicles

- overland flow paths.

· provision is made for onsite drainage which does not cause damage or nuisance flows to adjoining properties.

Stormwater was addressed in the LEP assessment earlier in this report. Relevant conditions of consent are attached in relation to stormwater management of the site. The stormwater outcomes are thus met.

Erosion and Sedimentation

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Erosion and Sedimentation:

· Measures implemented during construction to ensure that the landform is stabilised and erosion is controlled.

Soil erosion control measures are required to be implemented onsite prior to works commencing. Attached is a condition of consent addressing this issue. The proposal meets this outcome.

DCP INFILL GUIDELINES

Development in a heritage setting must be assessed against Council’s DCP Infill Guidelines. These guidelines seek to ensure that infill development in heritage areas is of good quality and sensitive design, and retains historic character. It states that an important aspect of good design is designing in context and having regard to the site and its surroundings, with particular consideration to the surrounding built form and significant landscaping. The objectives for infill design are as follows:

· retention of appropriate visual setting (Article 8 Burra Charter)

· to ensure new buildings respond to and enhance the character and appearance of the streetscapes of the Heritage Conservation Areas

· to ensure contributory heritage items retain their prominence and are not dominated by new development within a Heritage Conservation Area and do not compromise the heritage values of the existing area

· to ensure new buildings do not adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the Heritage Conservation Area or heritage items

· to allow for reasonable change within a Heritage Conservation Area while ensuring all other heritage objectives are met

· to ensure new development facilitates the retention of significant vegetation that contributes to the tree canopy, especially within the Central Orange Heritage Conservation Area.

Full consideration of relevant heritage provisions has previously been assessed in the LEP Heritage assessment, where it is considered that the amended design is of a suitable scale and form for the neighbourhood. Minor changes are required to materials and detailing as recommended by Council’s Heritage Advisor to ensure that the design complements the surrounding heritage character. Relevant conditions of consent are attached in regards to the recommended detailing changes and suitable heritage colours.

A condition of consent also requires an amended landscaping plan, which was discussed in greater detail earlier in the LEP and DCP assessments. This will ensure that the tree loss can be sufficiently mitigated and suitable species are replanted for the layout of the site and heritage setting.

Overall, it is considered that the development meets the objectives of the Infill Guidelines.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN 2017

The development has been assessed pursuant to Orange Development Contributions Plan 2017 towards the provision of public facilities. The proposal involves the development of an additional lot (and two bedroom dwelling). The existing duplex and its subdivision does not generate additional population or demand for facilities, therefore does not require the payment of any further development contributions.

The following payment for one additional lot (Development in Remainder of LGA) is applicable at the first subdivision stage as follows:

Open Space and Recreation	@ $3,922.87 x 1 additional lot	3,922.87
Community and Cultural	@ $1,137.63 x 1 additional lot	1,137.63
Roads and Cycleways	@ $5,178.06 x 1 additional lot	5,178.06
Stormwater Drainage	-	0
Local Area Facilities	-	0
Plan Preparation & Administration	@ $307.16 x 1 additional lot	307.16
TOTAL:		$10,545.72

Water and Sewer Headworks Charges

Local Government Act 1993 Section 64 water and sewer headwork charges are also applicable to the proposed new dwelling at 1ET for sewer and 1ET for water.

The attached Notice contains conditions of consent requiring the payment of these contributions at the relevant stages of development.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s4.15(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal does not involve the demolition of a building.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

A Construction Certificate will be required for a fire wall to be constructed between the two existing duplex units. The proposed dwelling will have adequate setbacks and a fire wall (on eastern garage wall) to comply with the BCA’s fire safety requirements. Relevant conditions are attached.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

Upgrading of the building will be required to ensure that the existing building is brought into partial or total conformity with the Building Code of Australia, including a fire wall as discussed above and hard-wired smoke alarms. Conditions are attached in relation to the required upgrading works.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

A satisfactory BASIX Certificate has been submitted in support of the proposed new dwelling.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s4.15(1)(b)

Neighbourhood Amenity, Visual, and Heritage Impacts

Subject to conditions of consent changing minor details of the proposed new dwelling, including materials, detailing, colours and landscaping, the proposed development will provide and retain a reasonable standard of residential amenity for the existing and proposed dwellings, including development on adjoining lands in respect of solar access, privacy etc.

The proposed development will provide for a continuation of residential land use, albeit in a more compact form, and will not alter the function or character of the neighbourhood. Subject to conditions of consent, the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on neighbourhood amenity or heritage values of the conservation area and nearby listed buildings.

Adverse impacts upon the character of the neighbourhood, amenity of neighbours, and heritage significance of the conservation area are unlikely, as addressed throughout this report under the relevant LEP and DCP assessments.

Traffic Impacts

Whilst access is proposed via a narrow road Council’s Technical Services Department advise that the capacity of the road network in the vicinity of the site is sufficient to accommodate additional localised traffic generated by the development. Council’s Technical Services Division advises that the proposed new driveway, car parking and manoeuvring areas are sufficient, as previously considered in the DCP assessment. Conditions of consent are recommended in regards to driveway design, and forward gear ingress and egress from the battleaxe lot.

Overall, adverse traffic impacts are unlikely.

Environmental Impacts

The subject land has a long history of being used for residential development, and as a result significant vegetation, threatened species or ecological endangered communities or their habitats are unlikely. Stormwater can be adequately dealt with on the site, and relevant conditions of consent are attached in regards to its design and engineering.

Provided that adequate measures are implemented during the construction phase, the proposed development would not generate adverse impacts in terms of soil erosion. Attached are recommended conditions of consent addressing this issue.

Replacement planting will mitigate the loss of the existing tree, providing for canopy and habitat in the central City area.

For these reasons the proposed development is unlikely to impact upon the locality in terms of environmental impacts.

Cumulative Impacts

The proposal will generally maintain the pattern of development that characterises this neighbourhood. The reduction of the proposed dwelling to single storey and only two bedrooms, as well as conditions of consent requiring minor detailing, material, colour and landscaping changes for the new dwelling, will ensure that the development will generally complement the style of surrounding dwellings and streetscape.

The proposal provides for a continuation of residential land use, albeit in a more compact form. Although it is acknowledged that further infill development in close proximity to the City centre is likely and will increase the density of the area, the provisions of the LEP and DCP allow for and encourage this future growth, subject to meeting various standards and guidelines. The proposed development meets those guidelines.

The proposed development will not reduce the open space, solar access or privacy afforded to neighbouring properties. Similarly, the site layout and building design will provide a reasonable standard of residential amenity for the existing duplex and proposed dwelling in terms of open space, solar access and privacy.

Adverse cumulative impacts are therefore considered unlikely.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s4.15(1)(c)

The site is considered suitable for the proposed development as follows:

· the proposed subdivision and construction of a new dwelling are permitted with consent in the zone;

· the proposal provides for a continuation of residential land use, albeit in a more compact form;

· heritage and visual impacts can be mitigated through conditions of consent requiring minor changes to the proposed dwelling (materials, colours, detailing etc);

· suitable replacement landscaping can be provided by way of an amended landscaping plan which mitigates the removal of the mature tree from the site;

· the proposed battleaxe lot can achieve practical and legal access to Rosemary Lane;

· all utility services are available to the site and adequate for the proposal;

· the proposed development will be connected to Council’s sewer, town water and stormwater reticulations in accordance with normal requirements;

· there are no physical attributes within the site that would unreasonably constrain the development; and

· the site is not known to be contaminated.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s4.15(1)(d)

The proposed development is defined as "advertised development" under the provisions of the DCP.

First Exhibition Period

The initial application was advertised for the prescribed period of 14 days (advertised Thursday, 15 March 2018 - exhibition closed 30 March 2018) and at the end of that period two (2) submissions were received objecting to the proposal. Based on the original development the following issues were raised:

· overshadowing and solar access – impacts to daylighting, especially morning sun for neighbouring properties (private open space and living room windows), requests independent review of submitted shadowing diagrams

· visual bulk impacts from two storey new dwelling, site coverage, and proximity to eastern boundary – also results in inappropriate neighbourhood character

· visual privacy impacts – proposed windows overlook neighbours’ gardens and into habitable windows

· a Heritage Management document should be submitted in accordance with the LEP to assess heritage impacts

· parking – more onsite parking should be provided due to lack of street parking (1.2 each existing dwelling, 1.5 new dwelling, plus 0.6 visitor = 4.5)

· turning circles – tight manoeuvring for rear dwelling and garage

· private open space for proposed Lot 201 does not meet minimum DCP requirements – minimum 5 x 5 area, and not accessed from living rooms

· lack of privacy between proposed areas of private open space due to proximity to each other

· narrow landscaping along driveway and to rear of new dwelling unsuitable, and creates further impacts on solar access/shadowing

· special battleaxe provisions of DCP not met - size of lot, solar access impacts, privacy impacts

· potential stormwater impacts due to an increase in impermeable areas on the site

· over-development of the site – scale and density means the proposal cannot comply with all DCP requirements, and impacts on neighbours, heritage, and traffic/street.

In response to these issues, Council staff wrote to the applicant setting out the concerns raised by neighbours and Council officers, and recommended changes to the proposal to address these matters.

Second Exhibition Period

The applicant revised the proposal a few times, and the formal amendment (Dutch-gable second storey design) was re‑advertised and re-notified to neighbours for another period of 14 days (advertised 10 May 2018 - exhibition closed 24 May 2018). At the end of that period four (4) submissions were received, two of which were further objections from the original submitters. A summary of the issues raised is as follows:

· visual bulk impacts - two storey scale, density and site coverage are inconsistent with neighbourhood character (still raise concerns in regards to this aspect, despite the change in second storey design/bulk)

· visual appearance, materials etc not in keeping with surrounding dwellings

· solar access and daylighting impacts - especially morning sun for neighbouring properties to south and to the vegetable garden at 75 March Street

· requests an independent review of submitted shadowing diagrams - Council staff checked the submitted shadow diagrams and calculations where it was found that some of the information was incorrect (while 9am shadow lengths will be worse than indicated, calculations of available daylighting between 11am and 3pm will be greater than indicated). Despite this error, compliance with the DCP solar access standards could be achieved

· visual privacy impacts - proposed windows overlook neighbours’ gardens and into habitable windows, overlooking from windows on second storey into eastern and western neighbouring properties’ gardens

· Heritage Management document should be submitted in accordance with LEP to assess heritage impacts

· turning circles – tight manoeuvring for rear dwelling and garage, overhang of car means only one car can fit/manoeuvre, will not work without hitting fencing etc

· landscaping - inappropriate species, unable to suitably maintain hedging between fence and new dwelling, and removal of substantial tree impacts amenity of neighbours’ gardens

· DCP battleaxe provisions - special battleaxe provisions of DCP have not been met, including lot size (minimum area of 650m²), solar access, privacy and impacts to residential amenity/quality

· stormwater impacts due to an increase in impermeable areas on the site

· traffic impacts - Rosemary Lane is a quiet street with narrow width, and the proposal will result in increased traffic/flows and impacts to neighbourhood character

· precedence - unwelcome precedence, scale and density are inappropriate.

Third Exhibition Period

Following an assessment of the amended application and taking into account the above issues, the applicant sought to further amend the design of the new dwelling to address concerns raised in the additional submissions (reduced to single storey height, two (2) bedrooms and a single garage). This amendment was re‑advertised and re-notified to neighbours for another period of 14 days (advertised 9 August 2018, exhibition closed 24 August 2018). At the end of that period one (1) submission was received from a previous submitter. A summary of the issues raised are as follows:

· The low roof pitch and wall materials have no relationship to the surrounding residential development. It will have the appearance of an industrial self-storage unit. A rendered or face brick wall with a higher pitched roof would be more appropriate for the locality. The lack of eaves is a direct result of pushing the building as close as possible to its boundaries, the visual appearance and quality being compromised as a result.

· There is no overshadowing detail of the amended design, though have substantial concerns that the property to the south in March Street will lose substantial sunlight to their northern courtyard. Council staff need to make a proper shadow assessment of the impact upon the rear yard of 77A March Street.

· The previous concerns still exist regarding the turning paths out of the garage. Council staff cannot be assured that a vehicle parked on the western half of the garage could leave the site in a forward direction. This is of a concern regarding traffic safety in a narrow road such as Rosemary Lane.

These issues have been addressed in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ and ‘Likely Impacts’ section of the report. In particular, the design of the amended roof is considered acceptable in form and bulk, however the proposed materials require some further changes to make the new dwelling fit within the heritage setting. This includes the rendering of external walls as suggested in the submission, and conditions of consent are attached in regards to this matter.

Although further shadowing details have not been provided for the amended roof form, Council officer calculations for the two storey design demonstrated compliance, therefore the lower roof form will also comply, as discussed in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’. While it is acknowledged that neighbouring properties will be affected by overshadowing, especially in the mornings, minimum winter daylight hours in accordance with the DCP can be achieved and adverse impacts are not expected.

Turn paths comply with the relevant standards, and the proposal has been amended to a single garage. While the double garage would have resulted in tight manoeuvring (although compliant), the single garage will result in much easier movements within the site, as set out in ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’.

In terms of previous concerns raised in submissions from the first and second exhibition periods, it is considered that these have been addressed in the main body of the report, in particular in the LEP Heritage assessment, ‘Section 7.7 - Design Elements for Residential Development’ and ‘Likely Impacts’ sections of the report.

Many of the initially raised issues have been mitigated through revised design, including reducing the bulk of the new dwelling by removing the second storey, removing landscaping along the southern boundary and reducing the garage from double to single capacity to improve manoeuvring. Visual privacy and overlooking impacts are negated as a result of removing the second storey element.

Conditions of consent require minor changes to the proposal to address concerns in regards to the detailing/visual appearance of the new dwelling. Heritage Management Plans do not exist for the nearby listed buildings and are not required for the proposed development, therefore are not relevant in this case.

While the special battleaxe provisions of the DCP have not been met (minimum area of 650m²), adequate solar access, privacy and servicing can be provided on the site. While cumulative impacts are likely as more infill development occurs in the area, these impacts are considered minor and reasonable, where the LEP and DCP allow for future growth.

Overall, conditions of consent can sufficiently mitigate any potential impacts, including minor changes to address landscaping, visual appearance and heritage concerns of the new dwelling.

PUBLIC INTEREST s4.15(1)(e)

The proposed development is considered to be of minor interest to the wider public due to the relatively localised nature of potential impacts. The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines etc. that have not been considered in this assessment.

SUMMARY

COMMENTS

The requirements of Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor, Engineering Development Section, Manager City Presentation, and Heritage Advisor are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

Attachments

1 Notice of Approval, D18/50836 ⇩

2 Plans, D18/50855 ⇩

3 Submissions, D18/50806 ⇩

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.4 Development Application DA 16/2018(1) - 38-40 Rosemary Lane

Attachment 1 Notice of Approval

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

Development Application No DA 16/2018(1)

NA18/ Container PR17008

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 4.18

Development Application
Applicant Name:	Mr R M Pitt
Applicant Address:	C/ Anthony Daintith Town Planning PO Box 1975 ORANGE NSW 2800
Owner’s Name:	Ms JO Pitt
Land to Be Developed:	Lot 100 DP 857135 – 38-40 Rosemary Lane, Orange
Proposed Development:	Subdivision (two lot residential), Demolition (tree removal), Dwelling and Attached Garage, and Subdivision (two lot residential)

Building Code of Australia building classification:	To be determined by the PC

Determination made under Section 4.16
Made On:	2 October 2018
Determination:	CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

Consent to Operate From:	3 October 2018
Consent to Lapse On:	3 October 2023

Terms of Approval

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

(1) To ensure a quality urban design for the development which complements the surrounding environment.

(2) To maintain neighbourhood amenity and character.

(3) To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(4) To provide adequate public health and safety measures.

(5) Because the development will require the provision of, or increase the demand for, public amenities and services.

(6) To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

(7) To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(8) To minimise the impact of development on the environment.

Conditions

(1) The development must be carried out in accordance with:

(a) Plans numbered 2018-023DA, prepared by Anthony Daintith Town Planning, and dated 26.07.2018 (6 sheets)

(b) statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

(2) All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

(3) A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a) showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

(b) showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

(5) Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989 must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the following information:

(a) in the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:

(i) the name and the licence number of the principal contractor, and

(ii) the name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that Act,

(b) in the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

(i) the name of the owner-builder, and

(ii) if the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder permit under that Act, the number of the owner-builder permit.

(a) protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

(b) where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

TWO LOT SUBDIVISION (to create Lot 200)

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(7) Engineering plans, showing details of all proposed work and adhering to any engineering conditions of development consent, are to be submitted to, and approved by, Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

(8) The development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater detention within the development, designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of lower frequency (that is, a rarer event) without damage to downstream developments. Where appropriate, the spillway design capacity is to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Dam Safety Committee.

· catchment plan showing sub-catchments under existing and developed conditions;

· schematic diagram of the catchment model showing sub areas and linkages;

· tabulation detailing the elevation, storage volume and discharge relationships; and

· tabulation for the range of frequencies analysed, the inflows, outflows and peak storage levels for both existing and developed conditions;

(9) A 150mm-diameter sewer junction is to be constructed from Council’s existing main to serve proposed Lot 200. Prior to a Construction Certificate being issued engineering plans for this sewerage system are to be submitted to and approved by Orange City Council.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(10) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

(11) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(12) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

(13) The provisions and requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code are to be applied to this application and all work constructed within the development is to be in accordance with that Code.

(14) All services are to be contained within the allotment that they serve.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(15) Prior to the issuing of the first Subdivision Certificate, the payment of $10,503.71 shall be made to Council in accordance with the Orange Development Contributions Plan 2017 for one additional lot as follows:

Open Space and Recreation	@ $3,922.87 x 1 additional lot	3,922.87
Community and Cultural	@ $1,137.63 x 1 additional lot	1,137.63
Roads and Cycleways	@ $5,178.06 x 1 additional lot	5,178.06
Stormwater Drainage	-	0
Local Area Facilities	-	0
Plan Preparation & Administration	@ $307.16 x 1 additional lot	307.16
TOTAL:		$10,545.72

The contribution shall be indexed quarterly in accordance with the Orange Development Contributions Plan 2017, which may be inspected at Council, or on Council’s website.

(16) Prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate, a Surveyor’s Certificate or written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority, stating that the buildings within the boundaries of the proposed lots comply in respect to the distances of walls from boundaries.

(17) Application shall be made for a Subdivision Certificate under Section 6.3(1)(d) of the Act.

(18) Payment of contributions for water, sewer and drainage works is required to be made at the contribution rate applicable at the time that the payment is made. The contributions are based on 1.0 ETs for water supply headworks and 1.0 ETs for sewerage headworks. A Certificate of Compliance, from Orange City Council in accordance with the Water Management Act 2000, will be issued upon payment of the contributions.

This Certificate of Compliance is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(19) Application is to be made to Telstra/NBN for infrastructure to be made available to each individual lot within the development. Either a Telecommunications Infrastructure Provisioning Confirmation or Certificate of Practical Completion is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority confirming that the specified lots have been declared ready for service prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(20) A Notice of Arrangement from Essential Energy stating arrangements have been made for the provision of electricity supply to the development, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(21) All services are to be contained within the allotment that they serve. A Statement of Compliance, from a Registered Surveyor, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(22) A Certificate of Compliance, from a Qualified Engineer, stating that the stormwater detention basin complies with the approved engineering plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(23) Certification from Orange City Council is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate stating that all works relating to connection of the development to Council assets, works on public land, works on public roads, stormwater, sewer and water reticulation mains and footpaths have been carried out in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the foregoing conditions, and that Council will take ownership of the infrastructure assets.

(24) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

TWO LOT SUBDIVISION (to create Lots 201 and 202) AND FIRE WALL

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(25) A 150mm-diameter sewer junction is to be constructed from Council’s existing main to serve proposed Lot 201. Prior to a Construction Certificate being issued engineering plans for this sewerage system are to be submitted to and approved by Orange City Council.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(26) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(27) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(28) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(29) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

(30) No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(31) A Surveyor’s Certificate or written statement is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority, stating that the buildings within the boundaries of proposed Lots 201 and 202 comply in respect of the distances of walls from boundaries and the common wall construction prior to the issuing of the Subdivision Certificate.

(32) Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the applicant is to provide a written statement that the building complies with the Building Code of Australia with regard to fire separation and early warning systems (hard wired smoke detectors).

(33) Application shall be made for a Subdivision Certificate under Section 6.3(1)(d) of the Act.

(34) Application is to be made to Telstra/NBN for infrastructure to be made available to each individual lot within the development. Either a Telecommunications Infrastructure Provisioning Confirmation or Certificate of Practical Completion is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority confirming that the specified lots have been declared ready for service prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(35) A Notice of Arrangement from Essential Energy stating arrangements have been made for the provision of electricity supply to the development, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(36) All services are to be contained within the allotment that they serve. A Statement of Compliance, from a Registered Surveyor, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Subdivision Certificate.

(37) The existing dwellings on proposed Lots 201 and 202 shall be connected to the sewer by individual sewer junctions. Evidence of the satisfactory completion of such work is to be provided to the Principle Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

(38) Certification from Orange City Council is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate stating that all works relating to connection of the development to Council assets, works on public land, works on public roads, stormwater, sewer and water reticulation mains and footpaths have been carried out in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the foregoing conditions, and that Council will take ownership of the infrastructure assets.

(39) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

DWELLING ON LOT 200

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

(40) Full amended plans for the new dwelling hereby approved shall be submitted and approved by Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The amended plans shall include full details of external colours and finishes of external materials, and the following amendments, in consultation with Council officers and Council’s Heritage Advisor:

· Fielders traditional custom orb galvanised steel (iron) cladding run horizontally;

· Weathertex classic smooth 200mm boards in Dulux Dune (or similar);

· Windspray custom orb Colorbond roofing, traditional rolled flashings, smooth half round gutters and circular downpipes;

· Timber verandah posts in Cabots Jarrah stain (or similar);

· All windows and doors to the front elevation to be clear finished timber;

· Tilt panel garage door with glazed toplights;

· The attic roof to have rolled form in place of the three changes in slope;

· The pitch of the lower roof to be adjusted to 10 degrees and the attic eave to be set back as a fascia against the walls; and

· The attic windows in the east and west elevations to be reduced in height and width to a nominal 1200x1500mm to reflect their attic location and character, and to be provided with traditional propped awnings for shading and weather protection, as well as to ensure privacy to neighbouring properties.

(41) An amended detailed landscaping plan prepared by a suitably qualified landscape architect shall be submitted to and approved by Councils Manager Development Assessments prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The amended plan shall indicate appropriate plantings, including species that are appropriate for the heritage setting, locations, planting bed depths, orientations, etc., and shall include at least one deep rooted tree in each lot, with mature heights comparable to the height of the dwellings on the site.

(42) An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act is to be sought from Orange City Council, as the Water and Sewer Authority, for water, sewer and stormwater connection. No plumbing and drainage is to commence until approval is granted.

(43) Prior to the issue of a construction certificate evidence shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority that proposed Lot 200 has been registered with NSW Land and Property Information.

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

(44) A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

(45) A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available onsite.

(46) Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

(47) All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

(48) A Registered Surveyor’s certificate identifying the location of the building on the site must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of the slab or footings.

(49) All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

(50) Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

(51) A concrete driveway, kerb layback and footpath crossing is to be constructed to a minimum width of 3.0 metres for the full length of the battle axe access handle. All work shall be to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

(52) A 1.8m high fence shall be provided around the perimeter of the development, excluding the frontage. A 1.8m high fence shall be provided between each lot. The height of the fences shall be measured from the highest finished ground level adjacent to each part of that fence. Fencing shall not protrude forward of the existing dwellings.

(53) Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved amended plans and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments.

(54) No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

(55) Where Orange City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a final inspection of water connection, sewer and stormwater drainage shall be undertaken by Orange City Council and a compliance certificate issued, prior to the issue of either an interim or a final Occupation Certificate.

(56) Certification from Orange City Council is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate stating that all works relating to connection of the development to Council assets, works on public land, works on public roads, stormwater, sewer and water reticulation mains and footpaths have been carried out in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the foregoing conditions, and that Council will take ownership of the infrastructure assets.

(57) All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation or Subdivision Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

(58) All vehicles shall enter and leave the premises in a forward direction.

Other Approvals

(1) Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under section 68.

Nil

(2) General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

Nil

Right of Appeal

*Disability Discrimination* Act 1992:	This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation. The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.

*Disclaimer - S88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919* - Restrictions on the Use of Land:**	The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.

Signed:	On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL
Signature:
Name:	PAUL JOHNSTON - MANAGER DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENTS
Date:	3 October 2018

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.5 Development Application DA 211/2018(1) - 10, 12 and 14 Gateway Crescent

RECORD NUMBER: 2018/2419

AUTHOR: Summer Commins, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	13 June 2018
Applicant/s	Orange Motor Group
Owner/s	Adtec Pty Ltd and JA & RA Eastham Pty Ltd
Land description	Lots 3, 26 and 27 DP 270446 10, 12 and 14 Gateway Crescent, Orange
Proposed land use	Vehicle Sales or Hire Premises (alterations and additions) and Business Identification Signs
Value of proposed development	$4,000,000

Council's consent is sought for alterations and additions to the site and premises of Orange Motor Group located at 12 and 14 Gateway Crescent. The proposal involves additions to the existing building to provide dedicated showrooms for four brands, and enlarged workshop and service facilities; expansion of vehicle display areas and car parking to 10 Gateway Crescent; and new signage for each of the brands.

The proposed development involves use of adjoining Lot 4 DP 270446 – 8 Gateway Crescent for vehicular access to accommodate the turn path of vehicle transporters/semi-trailers through the enlarged vehicle sales premises. An easement for access will be created in conjunction with the development to legitimise this arrangement.

The proposal is consistent with the planning provisions that apply to the subject land and particular landuse. No submissions have been received in relation to the application. The Planning and Development Committee has delegation to approve the application as the development value exceeds $1.5m. Approval of the application is recommended.

Figure 1 - locality plan

RECENT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

DECISION FRAMEWORK

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The proposed development involves expansion of the existing operation in a manner that is largely compliant with the abovementioned documents. Upgrading of the site and infilling of the adjoining land in the form proposed is considered to be acceptable for the eastern Gateway entrance to the City.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 211/2018(1) for Vehicle Sales or Hire Premises (alterations and additions) and Business Identification Signs at Lots 3, 26 and 27 DP 270446 – 10, 12 and 14 Gateway Crescent, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE PROPOSAL

Council’s consent is sought for alterations and additions to the current site and premises of Orange Motor Group located at 12 and 14 Gateway Crescent. The existing site layout is depicted below (refer Figure 2).

Figure 2 - existing site layout

The proposal involves the following elements:

· A building extension will be constructed on the northern side of the existing building within Lot 27 and Lot 3. The completed building will contain new showrooms and support areas for Holden, Kia, Honda and Audi, and an enlarged workshop/service facility.

· The site will be expanded to provide external vehicle display areas and onsite car parking within Lot 3. Vehicle display will be orientated to the Mitchell Highway, with customer parking sited along the Gateway Crescent frontage.

· New business identification signage will be provided for each of the brands. Separate freestanding pylon signs to 6m in height will be placed at the Highway frontage adjacent to the respective showrooms. New or replacement fascia signage will also be installed for each brand on the highway building façade to the existing and proposed showrooms.

The proposed site layout is depicted below (refer Figure 3).

Figure 3 - proposed site layout

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 1.7 - Application of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994

Having regard to the relevant provisions and based on an inspection of the subject property, it is considered that the proposed development is unlikely to significantly affect a threatened species. It is evident that the parcels have been highly modified by commercial subdivision and development and are unlikely to contain significant habitat or biodiversity value.

A Biodiversity Development Assessment Report is not required in support of the proposal.

Section 4.15

Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s4.15(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The particular aims of the LEP relevant to the application include:

(a) to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(c) to conserve and enhance the water resources on which Orange depends, particularly water supply catchments,

(f) to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be consistent with the above aims, as outlined in this report.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

Clause 1.6 is applicable and states:

The consent authority for the purposes of this Plan is (subject to the Act) the Council.

Clause 1.7 - Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor
Lot Size Map:	No Minimum Lot Size
Heritage Map:	Not a heritage item or conservation area
Height of Buildings Map:	No building height limit
Floor Space Ratio Map:	No floor space limit
Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:	No biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater vulnerable
Drinking Water Catchment Map:	Within the drinking water catchment
Watercourse Map:	Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:	Not within an urban release area
Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

Clause 1.9A is applicable and states in part:

(1) For the purpose of enabling development on land in any zone to be carried out in accordance with this Plan or with a consent granted under the Act, any agreement, covenant or other similar instrument that restricts the carrying out of that development does not apply to the extent necessary to serve that purpose.

(2) This clause does not apply:

(a) to a covenant imposed by the Council or that the Council requires to be imposed, or

(b) to any prescribed instrument within the meaning of section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989, or

(c) to any conservation agreement within the meaning of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, or

(d) to any Trust agreement within the meaning of the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001, or

(e) to any property vegetation plan within the meaning of the Native Vegetation Act 2003, or

(f) to any biobanking agreement within the meaning of Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, or

(g) to any planning agreement within the meaning of Division 6 of Part 4 of the Act.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the foregoing covenants, instruments, agreements or plans.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones

The subject land is zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor. The proposed development is defined as ‘vehicle sales or hire premises’ and ‘business identification sign.’ Pursuant to the LEP Dictionary:

Vehicle sales or hire premises means a building or place used for the display, sale or hire of motor vehicles, caravans, boats, trailers, agricultural machinery and the like, whether or not accessories are sold or displayed there.

Business identification sign means a sign:

(a) that indicates:

(i) the name of the person or business, and

(ii) the nature of the business carried on by the person at the premises or place at which the sign is displayed, and

(b) that may include the address of the premises or place and a logo or other symbol that identifies the business,

but that does not contain any advertising relating to a person who does not carry on business at the premises or place.

‘Vehicle sales or hire premises’ and ‘business identification signs’ are permitted with consent in the B6 zone.

Clause 2.3 - Zone Objectives and Land Use Table

The objectives for land zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor are:

· To promote businesses along main roads and to encourage a mix of compatible uses.

· To provide a range of employment uses (including business, office, retail and light industrial uses).

· To maintain the economic strength of centres by limiting retailing activity.

· To provide for residential uses, but only as part of a mixed use development.

The proposal satisfies the relevant zone objectives. The proposed expanded vehicle sales premises is a permitted and complementary land use in the zone and will contribute to the mix of land uses in this setting. The proposal comprises an employment use. The development does not involve retail or residential landuse.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

The Principal Development Standards do not apply to the subject land or proposed development.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

The Part 5 Provisions are not applicable.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

The development site is not located in an Urban Release Area and Part 6 does not apply.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

Clause 7.3 - Stormwater Management

Clause 7.3 is applicable. This clause states in part:

(3) Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

(a) is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting on-site infiltration of water, and

(b) includes, where practical, on-site stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, groundwater or river water, and

In consideration of Clause 7.3, a stormwater management plan has been prepared and implemented for the Gateway Business Park, and including the subject land. Stormwater from the development will connect to existing infrastructure in the locality. Council’s Development Engineer has recommended conditions of consent, which are included on the attached Notice of Approval, to satisfy the requirements of Clause 7.3.

Clause 7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

The subject land is identified as Groundwater Vulnerable on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. Clause 7.6 applies. This clause states in part:

(3) Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, the consent authority must consider:

(b) the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

In consideration of Clause 7.6, the proposed development will not involve processes or activities that would impact on groundwater resources. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring the proponent to enter into a Trade Waste Contract with Council.

Clause 7.7 - Drinking Water Catchments

The subject land is located within the drinking water catchment on the Drinking Water Catchment Map. Clause 7.7 is applicable and states in part:

(3) Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, the consent authority must consider whether or not the development is likely to have any adverse impact on the quality and quantity of water entering the drinking water storage, having regard to:

(a) the distance between the development and any waterway that feeds into the drinking water storage, and

(b) the on-site use, storage and disposal of any chemicals on the land, and

(c) the treatment, storage and disposal of waste water and solid waste generated or used by the development.

In consideration of this clause, a stormwater management plan has been prepared and implemented for the Gateway Business Park, and including the subject land. The stormwater management plan variously involves:

· minor (pipes) and major (road and overland flowpaths) drainage systems;

· enviropods in each stormwater inlet pit to remove gross pollutants from stormwater flows at their source;

· a retention/sediment basin to maintain stormwater discharge at predevelopment flows and to also act as a sediment basin in the construction and operational phases of the development; and

· a wetland (on the adjoining eastern parcel (16 Gateway Crescent)) to control stormwater quantity and quality. It has been designed with a deep water zone that will form a sedimentation zone followed by a mix of open water and reed beds to form the nutrient removal and further sediment removal zone.

Stormwater from the development will connect to existing infrastructure in the locality and thereby maintain the quality of water entering the catchment. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval in relation to stormwater management.

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies. This clause states:

(a) the supply of water,

(b) the supply of electricity,

(c) the disposal and management of sewage,

(d) stormwater drainage or on-site conservation,

(e) suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development:

· the subject land is connected to reticulated water and sewer;

· electricity and telecommunications are available;

· stormwater infrastructure is established through the business park;

· the site has frontage and access to Gateway Crescent.

The proposal involves use of adjoining Lot 4 DP 270446 – 8 Gateway Crescent for vehicular access to accommodate the turn path of vehicle transporters (see Figure 4 below). Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring the creation of a right‑of‑way prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate to legitimise this arrangement.

Figure 4 - semi-trailer turn path through the development site and Lot 4 DP 270448

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) is applicable. Pursuant to Clause 7 Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application:

(1) A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a) it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

In consideration of this clause, the potential for contamination of the site is considered low.

Lots 26 and 27 are well-established as a vehicle sales premises. The current use does not indicate evidence of potential contamination.

Lot 3 is presently vacant. The subject land is not contained within an investigation area, and has not been used for a listed Table 1 purpose to the contained land planning guidelines. Prior to subdivision of the parent parcel for business development, the subject land had longstanding rural use (although not orcharding use pursuant to the Orange 1:25,000 Topographic Map). The land has remained vacant since the subdivision of the business park in 2003. It is considered that Lot 3 is suitable in its current state for the proposed intensification of the adjoining vehicle sales use. Contamination investigation as a precursor to potential site remediation is considered unnecessary in conjunction with the proposal.

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage is applicable and states in part:

3 Aims, Objectives etc

(1) This Policy aims:

(a) to ensure that signage (including advertising):

(i) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and

(ii) provides effective communication in suitable locations, and

(iii) is of high quality design and finish, and

8 Granting of Consent to Signage

A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:

(a) that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in clause 3 (1) (a), and

(b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1.

In consideration of the relevant requirements of the SEPP, the proposed signage is consistent with the policy objectives and assessment criteria, as outlined below.

1 - Character of the Area

· Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

· Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?

The subject land is contained within the Gateway business park at the eastern entrance to the City. Advertising in this precinct comprises a mix of flush wall and fascia building signs, and pylon signs to the Mitchell Highway. The proposed signage will complement the advertising theme for the business park and existing signage on the subject land. Signage will be consistent with the desired visual character for the Gateway precinct.

2 - Special Areas

· Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?

The subject land does not contain or adjoin a special area.

3 - Views and Vistas

· Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

· Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?

· Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?

There are no significant views or vistas likely to be impacted by the proposed signage. The proposed signs will be generally confined to the building or be wholly located within the subject land, and will not protrude above the height of the proposed enlarged building. The signage will not obscure views or compromise viewing rights of other advertisers in this setting.

4 - Streetscape, Setting or Landscape

· Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?

· Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

· Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?

· Does the proposal screen unsightliness?

· Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?

· Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?

The proposed signage will have acceptable impacts on the streetscape and setting, as follows:

- Advertising is an expected visual element at the Gateway entrance to the City.

- The proposed advertising theme will complement signage in this setting and on the subject land.

- The site frontage and building width may accommodate four pylon signs and four fascia signs without causing visual cluttering (refer Figure 5). This advertising pattern is consistent with other motor showrooms in the City, where multiple brands are accommodated.

- A condition is included on the attached Notice of Approval prohibiting the display of advertising banners, flags or the like on the subject land or adjacent public reserve at the highway frontage.

Figure 5 - proposed pylon signs at the site frontage

5 - Site and Building

· Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

· Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?

· Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?

The proposed signage is considered to be appropriate for the site and building. The fascia signage will be generally contained within the building envelope and will be of appropriate proportions in relation to the fascia and building facade (refer images below). The proposed pylon signs will conform to the building height and not dominate the site frontage.

Figure 6 - proposed fascia signage

Figure 7 - proposed fascia signage

6 - Associated Devices and Logos with Advertisements and Advertising Structures

· Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?

Safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos are not required for the proposed facia and pylon signs.

7 - Illumination

· Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

· Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?

· Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?

· Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?

· Is the illumination subject to a curfew?

The proposed signage will be illuminated. No objection is raised to illumination due to the high ambient luminance in the highway/commercial setting.

8 - Safety

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

The proposed signage complies with the road safety assessment criteria outlined in the Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines (NSW Department of Planning 2007):

- The signage will not obstruct views of the highway for motorists, cyclists or pedestrians.

- The proposed signs will not obscure information about the road alignment or impact on stopping sight distances.

- The signage will be static and will not cause a distraction to motorists.

- The signs will not create hazardous headlight reflections.

State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007

Clauses 101 and 104 of SEPP Infrastructure 2007 are applicable to the proposed development.

Clause 101 - Development with Frontage to Classified Road

(1) The objectives of this clause are:

(a) to ensure that new development does not compromise the effective and ongoing operation and function of classified roads, and

(b) to prevent or reduce the potential impact of traffic noise and vehicle emission on development adjacent to classified roads.

(2) The consent authority must not grant consent to development on land that has a frontage to a classified road unless it is satisfied that:

(a) where practicable, vehicular access to the land is provided by a road other than the classified road, and

(b) the safety, efficiency and ongoing operation of the classified road will not be adversely affected by the development as a result of:

(i) the design of the vehicular access to the land, or

(ii) the emission of smoke or dust from the development, or

(iii) the nature, volume or frequency of vehicles using the classified road to gain access to the land, and

(c) the development is of a type that is not sensitive to traffic noise or vehicle emissions, or is appropriately located and designed, or includes measures, to ameliorate potential traffic noise or vehicle emissions within the site of the development arising from the adjacent classified road.

In consideration of Clause 101, vehicular access to the Mitchell Highway (being a classified road) is not available for the subject land. The development will have nil impact on the safety, efficiency and ongoing operation of the highway. Commercial landuse is not sensitive to traffic noise or vehicle emissions.

Clause 104 - Traffic-Generating Development

(1) This clause applies to development specified in Column 1 of the Table to Schedule 3 that involves:

(a) new premises of the relevant size or capacity, or

(b) an enlargement or extension of existing premises, being an alteration or addition of the relevant size or capacity.

(3) Before determining a development application for development to which this clause applies, the consent authority must:

(a) give written notice of the application to RMS within 7 days after the application is made, and

(b) take into consideration:

(i) any submission that RMS provides in response to that notice within 21 days after the notice was given (unless, before the 21 days have passed, RMS advises that it will not be making a submission), and

In consideration of Clause 104, Schedule 2, Column 1 provides that “car parks (whether or not ancillary to other development)” are traffic generating where:

· 200 or more car parking spaces are provided on a site with access to a road (Column 2), or

· 50 ore more car parking spaces are provided on a site with access to a classified road or to a road that connects to a classified road within 90m (Column 3).

The development involves 133 car parking spaces with access to Gateway Crescent. The proposal is not traffic generating development as prescribed in Column 2. The subject land does not have access to a classified road, nor connect to a classified road within 90m. The proposal is not traffic generating development as prescribed in Column 3. Referral to the RMS is not required for the proposed development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION 4.15(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s4.15(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

DCP 2004-8 - Development in Business Zones

The Planning Outcomes applicable to Gateway Site Development (Part 8.5) are considered below.

· Buildings cover up to 50% of the site area.

The proposed completed building will comprise a building footprint of 3,243.36m². Based on consolidated site area of 10,997m², the development will have site coverage of 29.49%.

· Buildings are designed in a manner commensurate with the high profile of the site. Architectural features are provided to the front building façade to provide relief using such elements as verandahs, display windows, indented walls etc.

The subject land has frontage to Mitchell Highway, and frontage and access to Gateway Crescent. The proposed showroom addition will address the highway. Contemporary building design is proposed incorporating a rectilinear form, expansive glazing, modern fascia treatment, aluminium composite material (ACM) wall cladding and defined entry portals to each showroom. The proposed showroom addition is depicted in perspective below (see Figure 8).

The proponent submits that the building design is ‘commensurate with modern motor dealership architecture.’ It is considered that the built form presentation to the highway is appropriate for the Gateway location.

Figure 8 - proposed showrooms - presentation to Mitchell Highway

The enlarged workshop and service facility will have frontage to Gateway Crescent. The design and detailing for this component will relate to the existing workshop facility, with inclusion of contemporary elements (louvered band and ACM clad feature wall) to modernise and integrate the new work. A building addition for ‘book-in facility’ will adjoin the workshop on the eastern side, and complement the architectural detailing of the showrooms. It is considered that the architectural features to the ‘back of house’ Gateway Crescent frontage are of a high standard, and will significantly improve the existing building presentation to the public road. The workshop perspective is depicted below (see Figure 9).

Figure 9 - proposed workshop - presentation to Gateway Crescent

The proposed building design and detailing are considered suitable for the streetscape and setting, and will complement the built form nearby to the site.

· External materials consist of non-reflective building materials.

External finishes for the proposed building addition will comprise ACM cladding to walls, Colorbond sheeting to roof, and powdercoated aluminium glazing to doors and windows. A condition is recommended that external materials be non-reflective.

· Adequate parking and onsite manoeuvring are provided.

Sufficient onsite parking will be provided for the expanded vehicle sales premises, as outlined below (refer DCP 2004-15 Car Parking). Furthermore, the site layout and building design will accommodate the functional and forward-direction turn path of a car (4.91m), medium rigid vehicle (8.8m) and semi-trailer (13.7m). All vehicles associated with the site will enter and exit in a forward direction.

As outlined previously, the proposal involves use of adjoining Lot 4 DP 270446 to the west for vehicular access to accommodate the turn path of semi-trailers/vehicle transporters. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring the creation of the necessary right-of-way prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate in order to legitimise this arrangement.

· Advertising involves business identification signs within the front façade and/or by a pole sign comparable with the relative height of the main building on the site.

The proposed signage scheme satisfies this planning outcome, as outlined in the foregoing sections of this report.

· Security fencing is located or designed in a manner that does not dominate the visual setting of the area.

The proposal involves removal of fencing to the Mitchell Highway frontage. Existing palisade fencing to the Gateway Crescent frontage for Lots 26 and 27 will be extended to include Lot 3 (refer Figure 10 below). The proposed fencing will be consistent with fencing to this site and adjoining 8 Gateway Crescent and is considered suitable. Adjacent landscaping will provide integration and screening of the fencing.

Figure 10 - existing palisade fencing to Gateway Crescent frontage

· Buildings achieve the setback prescribed in the DCP provisions.

The DCP prescribes the following applicable setback for the Gateway business park:

- 20m from the Mitchell Highway, and

- 15m from Gateway Crescent.

The proposed showroom addition will be sited a minimum 16m from the Mitchell Highway, frontage. The departure from the DCP is considered to be acceptable as follows:

- The existing showroom building already encroaches within the prescribed setback. The proposed addition will adopt a consistent building line and setback encroachment with the existing building.

- The proposed showroom addition will present a commercial character and quality aesthetic to the highway frontage. It is noted that the DCP permits a setback variation for office use and presentation in conjunction with other approved activity. It is appropriate to apply this discretion in the circumstances.

- The proposed setback will relate to the highway setback for other adjoining buildings in this streetscape and reasonably complement the streetscape building line.

- The 7m wide public reserve between the subject land and highway will afford an additional visual setback for the proposed building addition.

- The proposed single-storey and rectilinear built form will assist to minimise visual encroachment on the highway frontage.

The proposed workshop addition will be sited a minimum 14m (wall) and 10m (covered awning) from the Gateway Crescent frontage. The wall encroachment is considered to be minor and within reasonable limit. Architectural detailing to the façade will reduce the visual bulk of this element. The encroaching awning structure is of limited visual bulk as it does not contain walls or posts. The section of building below this awning (which complies with the DCP setback) has a commercial character due to extensive shopfront glazing.

Based on the foregoing, the proposed building setbacks are considered to be acceptable, notwithstanding some departure from the DCP.

· Applications are accompanied by a detailed landscaped plan.

Existing landscaping at the site frontages to the Mitchell highway and Gateway Crescent will be largely retained and continued onto the expanded site. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring preparation and implementation of a landscape plan for the expanded vehicle sales premises, consistent with the landscaping provisions at DCP 2004-8.5.

· Development of the land is to provide for the integrated and effective management of stormwater runoff.

A stormwater management plan is in place for the Gateway Business Park, and including the subject land. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring stormwater management consistent with Council’s Development and Subdivision Code.

DCP 2004-15 - Car Parking

· Adequate off-street car parking is provided in accordance with the Table, or alternatively, according to an assessment that demonstrates peak parking demand based on recognised research.

Pursuant to DCP 2004, the minimum parking requirement for vehicle sales premises (motor showrooms) is 1 space per 100m² of site area plus 3 spaces for every work bay for vehicle servicing, with such spaces exclusive of cars displayed for sale.

The proponent has calculated that the expanded vehicle sales premises will require 129 onsite parking spaces (refer below).

A total of 133 onsite parking spaces will be provided, comprising 84 standard spaces and 48 tandem spaces (independent or stacked).

The proposed parking arrangements are considered acceptable as follows:

- The sales/display functions will generate parking demand of 36 spaces (based on sales and support areas of 3,544.82m²). Forty-nine (49) car spaces are available at the Gateway Crescent site frontage and adjacent to the eastern boundary.

- The service/workshop functions will generate parking demand of 93 spaces (based on 31 work bays). Workshop parking demands will be accommodated via 13 surplus spaces above, 51 independent spaces to the north west of the workshop, and adjacent 32 tandem spaces. Tandem spaces will be managed by workshop staff and will not be accessible to customers.

- The expanded vehicle sales premises will provide a drive-through drop-off zone for vehicle servicing. This arrangement will minimise take-up of customer parking associated with sales and display.

Based on the foregoing, sufficient onsite parking will be provided for the expanded vehicle sales premises.

DCP 2004-00 - Transitional Provisions - Transport Routes

· The development provides a high standard of visual appeal to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians as well as adjoining property owners.

· The visual appearance of the development, including any signage, lighting or other ancillary element, must not generate a distraction to motorists.

· Any signage must not be animated whether by movement or flashing lights.

· Where land has more than one street frontage the street with the lower volume of traffic is to provide the principal access to the development, subject to safety considerations.

· Where access is provided onto an arterial road, distributor road or major collector road, the access point must have appropriate safe sight distances for the prevailing speed limit and clear unimpeded entrance / exit signage must be displayed.

· Where on-site customer parking is provided that is not immediately visible from a public road, clear and unimpeded directional signage must be displayed.

· Where the proposal is residential, or another noise sensitive form, appropriate noise mitigation measures to limit the development from traffic noise must be demonstrated.

The proposed development satisfies the above relevant planning outcomes:

- As outlined in this report, the proposed development will present a commercial character and quality aesthetic to the highway frontage.

- There are no visual aspects of the proposal that will generate a distraction to motorists. As considered previously, the proposed signage will satisfy the road safety assessment criteria outlined in the Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines (NSW Department of Planning 2007). A condition is included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring external lighting of the site to comply with applicable standards, and not cause nuisance glare.

- Existing site access is via Gateway Crescent. The proposal will not alter this arrangement.

- Onsite customer parking will be accessible and visible from the main site entrance on Gateway Crescent.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s4.15(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal involves partial demolition of the existing building. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring demolition works to be carried out consistent with relevant standards and guidelines.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

The development site will be consolidated in order to satisfy fire safety considerations of the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring lodgement of a consolidation plan prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

Upgrading of the existing building will be required to ensure the existing building is brought into partial or total conformity with the BCA. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval in relation to the upgrading works.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

A Section J energy efficiency statement will be required with the Construction Certificate application. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval to this effect.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s4.15(1)(b)

Visual Impacts

As outlined in this report, the proposal will have acceptable visual impacts for the site and precinct. The proposed development will present a commercial character and quality aesthetic to the highway frontage, commensurate with the Gateway location at the eastern entrance to the City. Mitigation conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval in relation to exterior colours, finishes and landscaping.

Traffic Impacts

The proposal will have an acceptable impact on local traffic amenity due to the following:

· Sufficient onsite parking will be provided for the expanded vehicle sales premises.

· The site layout and building design will accommodate the functional and forward-direction turn path of a car (4.91m), medium rigid vehicle (8.8m) and semi-trailer (13.7m) through the site. All vehicles associated with the site will enter and exit in a forward direction. An easement will be created to legitimise site access for vehicle transporters over adjoining Lot 4 DP 270446.

· The proposal will not alter existing site accesses via Gateway Crescent or necessitate additional accesses.

· The capacity of the local road network is sufficient to accommodate additional traffic as a consequence of the expanded vehicle sales premises (estimated at 19 additional vehicle trips at the evening peak, pursuant to the Guide to Traffic Generating Development (Roads and Traffic Authority 2002).

Noise

The ambient noise levels of the locality are typical to a highway business precinct. The proposal is unlikely to alter the neighbourhood acoustic setting. The site does not have a direct interface with sensitive landuses. Workshop openings will be oriented to within the site or adjoining commercial properties. Core operating hours will be during the daytime period when background noise levels are typically higher.

Water Quality

As outlined in this report, the proposal development will not adversely impact on water quality, subject to conditions relating to sediment and erosion controls during construction, stormwater management consistent with the Development and Subdivision Code, and a Trade Waste Agreement being entered into.

Air Quality

The proposed development does not involve any processes or activities that would affect the locality in terms of dust, odour or other atmospheric discharges.

Social and Economic Impacts

The proposed development may generate positive social and economic effects associated with construction, employment, local business expansion and the contribution of the City as a major regional business centre.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s4.15(1)(c)

The subject land is suitable for the proposed development due to the following:

· The proposal is permitted in the zone and is a complementary land use in this setting.

· The proposed development comprises an expansion and intensification of the existing use of the land for vehicle sales.

· The fire protection and structural capacity of the enlarged building will be appropriate subject to upgrading and land consolidation.

· Utility services are available and adequate.

· The site has legal and practical access to Gateway Crescent, subject to creation of a new easement.

· The site is of sufficient area to provide onsite parking to meet the demands of the development.

· The site has no particular environmental value.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s4.15(1)(d)

The proposed development is not defined as advertised development pursuant to DCP 2004-5.3. No submissions have been received in relation to this application.

PUBLIC INTEREST s4.15(1)(e)

The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines etc that have not been considered in this assessment. The proposed development is considered to be in the public interest as it will comprise quality infill development at the eastern gateway entrance to the City.

SUMMARY

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. The proposed development complies with the relevant aims, objectives and provisions of Orange LEP 2011 (as amended) and DCP 2004. A section 4.15 assessment of the development indicates that the development is acceptable in this instance. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval outlining a range of conditions considered appropriate to ensure that the development proceeds in an acceptable manner.

COMMENTS

The requirements of the Environmental Health and Building Surveyor and the Engineering Development Section are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

Attachments

1 Notice of Approval, D18/50772 ⇩

2 Plans, IC18/11447 ⇩

Planning and Development Committee 2 October 2018

2.6 Development Application DA 240/2018(1) - 216-238 Peisley Street

RECORD NUMBER: 2018/2260

AUTHOR: Michael Glenn, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	13 July 2018 (amended details 14 August 2018)
Applicant/s	Mr A Ashcroft
Owner/s	Peisley Property Holdings Pty Limited
Land description	Lot 4 DP 626604 - 216-238 Peisley Street, Orange
Proposed land use	Shop (alterations and additions to existing building) and Signage
Value of proposed development	$3,000,000

Council's consent is sought for internal alterations and refurbishment to the existing building, and external facelifts and signage to the premises.

Referral to PDC for determination is triggered by the overall cost of the development. Staff delegations are limited to developments costed to $1.5m or less, whereas this development has been estimated by the applicant at $3m.

Figure 1 - locality plan

RECENT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

This development application is for a significant refurbishment of the existing Peisley Street IGA supermarket. No issues of concern have been raised by staff in this report other than signage, which has been conditioned to comply with State requirements.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 240/2018(1) for Shop (alterations and additions to existing building) and Signage at Lot 4 DP 626604 - 216-238 Peisley Street, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE APPLICATION/PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the internal refurbishment of the supermarket and the erection of replacement signage, consisting of one wall mounted general advertisement and replacement business identification signs. The internal refurbishment involves new shelving aisle positions, the relocation of the frozen and small goods displays and rearrangement of the cool stores within the building. No increases in floor area and no changes to loading and/or parking is proposed.

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 1.7 - Application of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994

Having regard to the relevant provisions and based on an inspection of the subject property, it is considered that the proposed development is not likely to significantly affect a threatened species.

A Biodiversity Development Assessment Report is not required in this instance.

In this instance, site inspection reveals that the subject property has no biodiversity or habitat value.

Section 4.15

Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s4.15(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a) to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(c) to conserve and enhance the water resources on which Orange depends, particularly water supply catchments,

(d) to manage rural land as an environmental resource that provides economic and social benefits for Orange,

(e) to provide a range of housing choices in planned urban and rural locations to meet population growth,

(f) to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be consistent with LEP objectives.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.7 - Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned B3 Commercial Core
Lot Size Map:	No Minimum Lot Size
Heritage Map:	Not a heritage item or conservation area
Height of Buildings Map:	building height limit 12m
Floor Space Ratio Map:	floor space limit 1.5:1
Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:	No biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater vulnerable
Drinking Water Catchment Map:	Not within the drinking water catchment
Watercourse Map:	Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:	Not within an urban release area
Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Partially within a flood planning area
Rail Corridor	Adjacent a rail corridor

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

· covenants imposed or required by Council

· prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

· any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

· any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

· any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

· any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

· any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones and Clause 2.3 - Zone Objectives and Land Use Table

The subject site is located within the B3 Commercial Core zone. The proposed development is defined as a shop and signage under OLEP 2011 and is permitted with consent in this zone. This application is seeking consent.

Regulation of signs is controlled principally under State Environmental Planning Policy 64 – Advertising and Signage, and consequently the assessment relating to that part of the proposal is undertaken (within this report) under that legislation. Shop is defined under the standard instrument as:

… premises that sell merchandise such as groceries, personal care products, clothing, music, homewares, stationery, electrical goods or the like or that hire any such merchandise, and includes a neighbourhood shop, but does not include food and drink premises or restricted premises.

Shops are a type of retail premises and are permissible in the zone. Signage is also permissible subject to receiving development consent.

Clause 2.3 of LEP 2011 references the Land Use Table and Objectives for each zone in LEP 2011. These objectives for land zoned B3 Commercial Core are as follows:

1 - Objectives of the B3 Commercial Core Zone

· To provide a wide range of retail, business, office, entertainment, community and other suitable land uses that serve the needs of the local and wider community.

· To encourage appropriate employment opportunities in accessible locations.

· To maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

· To promote development that contributes to the role of the Orange CBD as the primary retail and business centre in the City and region.

The proposed development is generally consistent with the zone objectives, or those objectives are not relevant to the assessment of this application.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

Under State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) it is possible to alter signage and change the use from a shop to a range of other land uses, without the need to seek further development consent from Council. However in this case the proposed works are not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

Clause 4.3 - Height of Buildings

A maximum height limit of 12m is applicable, to which the proposed development complies.

Clause 4.4 - Floor Space Ratio

A maximum FSR of 1.5:1 is applicable, to which both the existing development and the proposed development complies.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

Not relevant to the application. The subject site is not located in an Urban Release Area.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.2 - Flood Planning

One part of the site at its northern extremity is within a flood planning area. This establishes floor levels for buildings within that area, plus a freeboard area for buildings adjacent that are within a certain height range of the Flood Planning Level (FPL).

The extent of flood affectation is shown below:

Figure 2 - Orange LEP 2011 - flood planning levels

The proposed development is a re-use and refurbishment of the existing building, with no change in floor levels proposed. It is considered acceptable in this instance to allow the retention of the existing floor area and further allow the renovations and upgrade to the building.

Council Technical Services Division has not raised any concerns with respect to flooding.

7.3 - Stormwater Management

No changes to the stormwater discharges or disposal arrangements are proposed. There are no changes to runoff likely to arise from the proposed development.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

This requires that Council consider:

(b) the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

Furthermore consent may not be granted unless Council is satisfied that:

(a) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

(b) if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

(c) if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies and states:

(a) the supply of water,

(b) the supply of electricity,

(c) the disposal and management of sewage,

(d) storm water drainage or on-site conservation,

(e) suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available to the land and adequate for the proposal.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) is applicable to the proposed development, but has no effect as the proposed development does not involve a change of use to the premises.

Pursuant to Clause 7 Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application:

(1) A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a) it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

In relation to (a) and (b), the risk of the site being contaminated has been considered. Such risk is considered to be low and the development will not result in significant soil disturbance. As such it is considered the proposed development poses no risk in terms of disturbing the site and possible contamination on the site. The site many years ago was used as a gasworks, which carries an inherent risk of contamination, however it has for many years been used for shops, with a very low risk of contamination. The site has a building and bitumen sealed car park erected thereon, which provides an effective cap to the soil located underneath. The proposed works do not propose any substantial disturbance of the site.

In relation to (c), it is considered that the land does not require remediation.

(2) Before determining an application for consent to carry out development that would involve a change of use on any of the land specified in sub clause (4), the consent authority must consider a report specifying the findings of a preliminary investigation of the land concerned carried out in accordance with the contaminated land planning guidelines.

In relation to (2), the proposed development does not involve a change of use.

(3) The applicant for development consent must carry out the investigation required by sub clause (2) and must provide a report on it to the consent authority. The consent authority may require the applicant to carry out, and provide a report on, a detailed investigation (as referred to in the contaminated land planning guidelines) if it considers that the findings of the preliminary investigation warrant such an investigation.

This part of clause 7 is not relevant.

(4) The land concerned is:

(a) land that is within an investigation area,

(b) land on which development for a purpose referred to in Table 1 to the contaminated land planning guidelines is being, or is known to have been, carried out,

(c) to the extent to which it is proposed to carry out development on it for residential, educational, recreational or child care purposes, or for the purposes of a hospital—land:

(i) in relation to which there is no knowledge (or incomplete knowledge) as to whether development for a purpose referred to in Table 1 to the contaminated land planning guidelines has been carried out, and

(ii) on which it would have been lawful to carry out such development during any period in respect of which there is no knowledge (or incomplete knowledge).

Not relevant to the subject application.

State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007

85 - Development Immediately Adjacent to Rail Corridors

Clause 85 has provisions relating to non-metropolitan land adjacent to rail corridors. This clause applies to development on land that is in or immediately adjacent to a rail corridor, if the development:

(a) is likely to have an adverse effect on rail safety, or

(b) involves the placing of a metal finish on a structure and the rail corridor concerned is used by electric trains, or

(c) involves the use of a crane in air space above any rail corridor.

None of the triggers contained in this clause are applicable to the proposed development. As a result, the assessment criteria contained in sub clause (2) has no relevance to this application.

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) is applicable and states in part:

3 Aims, Objectives etc

(1) This Policy aims:

(a) to ensure that signage (including advertising):

(i) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and

(ii) provides effective communication in suitable locations, and

(iii) is of high quality design and finish, and

The proposed development is not inconsistent to the aims and objectives of the policy

(8) Granting of Consent to Signage

A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:

(a) that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in clause 3 (1) (a), and

(b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1.

The proposed signs consist of the following:

1 A business identification sign (on the Byng Street elevation, facing north) The proposed sign is a wall sign with wordmark Ashcrofts Supa IGA +Liquor.

Figure 3 - northern elevation (facing Byng Street)

2 Three additional business identification signs will be visible from the west (Peisley Street).

Figure 4 - western elevation (facing Peisley Street)

Advertising Sign Component

The proposed development incorporates general advertising on the western elevation comprising a sign panel with a total area of 25.6m² of sign display area. The size of the proposed sign triggers a requirement to consider it against the provisions of clauses 13, 14 and 17 of the SEPP.

Clause 13 - Matter for consideration

(1) A consent authority must not grant consent to an application to display an advertisement to which this Policy applies unless the advertisement or the advertising structure, as the case requires:

(a) is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in clause 3 (1) (a), and

(b) has been assessed by the consent authority in accordance with the assessment criteria in Schedule 1 and the consent authority is satisfied that the proposal is acceptable in terms of its impacts, and

(c) satisfies any other relevant requirements of this Policy.

By reason of its proposed area (in excess of 20m²), the proposed sign does not meet all the requirements of the SEPP.

Clause 14 - Duration of consents

(1) A consent granted under this Part ceases to be in force:

(a) on the expiration of 15 years after the date on which the consent becomes effective and operates in accordance with section 83 of the Act,

The Notice of Determination includes a condition to this effect

Clause 17 - Advertisements with display area greater than 20 square metres or higher than 8 metres above ground

(1) This clause applies to an advertisement:

(a) that has a display area greater than 20 square metres, or

(b) that is higher than 8 metres above the ground.

(2) The display of an advertisement to which this clause applies is advertised development for the purposes of the Act.

(3) The consent authority must not grant consent to an application to display an advertisement to which this clause applies unless:

(a) the applicant has provided the consent authority with an impact statement that addresses the assessment criteria in Schedule 1 and the consent authority is satisfied that the proposal is acceptable in terms of its impacts, and

(b) the application has been advertised in accordance with section 79A of the Act, and

(c) the consent authority gave a copy of the application to RMS at the same time as the application was advertised in accordance with section 79A of the Act if the application is an application for the display of an advertisement to which clause 18 applies

As submitted the proposed sign would incorporate an area of 25.6m², which exceeds the threshold contained in this clause. However, the submission to Council does not include an impact statement as specified in part (a) of the SEPP. The application as submitted has not been configured so as to give Council the authority to approve the application where the area of the sign exceeds 20m². Further, the SEPP requires referral to the RMS and advertising of the application if the signage was to remain above 20m². Council staff have carried out an assessment of the impact of such signage and are of the view that the size of the signage would have an adverse impact upon the streetscape. In view of the above, a condition of consent is included requiring a minimum of two of the glazed panels in which the advertising is to be displayed to be retained as clear glass panels in the same way as other glazing in this row south of the main entrance is proposed to be treated. This will reduce the area of the sign to less than 20m² to be in compliance with the SEPP and address streetscape concerns raised by staff about the extent of signage proposed.

General Schedule 1 Assessment

Both the business identification signs component and the general advertising components are subject to general assessment under schedule 1 of the SEPP. The business identification component raises no significant issues, but the general advertising component does present some issues due to the expanse of the signage that is proposed.

It is proposed to remove the existing blueboard cladding to expose these hidden windows and then utilise them for general advertising. The window glazing to the south of the Peisley Street entry/exit will also be exposed, and at this point these windows will remain clear to allow views of the interior of the supermarket and thereby fulfil the function of a traditional shopfront window. This is considered useful to the promotion and restoration of this section of Peisley Street to a main street character. For this reason it is considered appropriate to include the following condition in the consent:

The clear street glazing as shown in the approved plans along the Peisley Street frontage south of the egress point shall remain clear, with no advertising displayed or attached to either the exterior or interior of this glazing.

For the glazing located on the northern side of the egress point, the submitted elevations show that these windows would be adorned with pictures of items like fruit. Viewed essentially as “boxes” on the building, it is considered that the proposed advertising scheme facing Peisley Street will have an adverse impact upon the streetscape. As alluded to above, a condition of consent has been recommended to reduce the extent of advertising in order to satisfy the requirements of the SEPP and to ensure that the signage element of the proposal is sufficiently constrained in a manner that is respectful of the streetscape and character of the locality.

1 - Character of the Area

· Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

· Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?

The area is characterised as a mix of commercial, industrial, rail and communications infrastructure, with a heritage overtone in the locality. Residential influences are less prevalent and less influential to the neighbourhood character. The character of the land is further influenced by the high profile location on the entrance to the business area of the City. Existing signage in Peisley Street to the north of Summer Street for several blocks is mixed. There is a greater density of signage as Summer Street is approached, and less signage further away. Buildings are generally two storeys on the western side of Peisley Street, and there is a mix of vacant blocks and one and two storey forms on the eastern side of the street.

The proposed signs subject to the recommended condition of consent which limit the extent of advertising are considered to be generally consistent with the existing character of the area, taking into consideration the overall scheme proposed.

The subject property is located within the CBD, in which the issue of excessive signage inappropriate to façade treatments applied to buildings, excessive sign displays, and sign displays that detract from the ambience and positive built forms in the street, are all identified as potential threats and detracting elements to the quality of the neighbourhood character that constitutes the CBD. In this case, it has been recommended that the advertising be restrained to comply with the requirements of the SEPP and reduce the overall impact of signage in the streetscape so as to be more in keeping with the character of the locality.

2 - Special Areas

Heritage conservation areas are applicable to the western side of Peisley Street and Summer Street, and a number of individually listed heritage items are also recorded in this locality. The subject site itself is not located in a heritage conservation It is considered that the proposed signs subject to a condition of consent will not have a significant effect on those special areas.

3 - Views and Vistas

· Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

· Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?

· Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?

The proposed signs are to be contained generally within the existing building silhouette.

4 - Streetscape, Setting or Landscape

· Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?

· Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

· Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?

· Does the proposal screen unsightliness?

· Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?

· Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?

It is considered that the proposed signs are generally reinforcing, or at least neutral, with regard to the provisions of this clause. In relation to these matters it is recommended that the extent of advertising content be reduced to comply with the SEPP requirements. The remaining business identification signs contained in the proposal can be considered to be generally consistent general building forms and massing evident in the street. The proposal in terms of messaging and visual impact is not inconsistent with the intent of the listed planning outcomes.

5 - Site and Building

· Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

· Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?

· Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?

The proposed development subject to the recommended condition of consent is compatible with the scale of the building. The signage for the development is considered to be a more or less standard design response for this style and scale of development.

6 - Associated Devices and Logos With Advertisements and Advertising Structures

· Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?

There are no safety devices or logos incorporated into the proposed advertisements that are likely to be misidentified as safety or traffic signs.

7 - Illumination

· Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

· Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?

· Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?

· Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?

· Is the illumination subject to a curfew?

Illumination of the proposed signs is not shown on the submitted plans.

8 - Safety

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?

· Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

It is considered that the proposed signs would not increase or place at risk safety in the terms specified in this clause.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION 4.15(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s4.15(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land Part 8 - Development in Business zones and Part 14 -Advertising) are the principal elements of the DCP applicable to the proposed development. An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant Planning Outcomes will be undertaken below.

Pursuant to Planning Outcome 0.2-1 Interim Planning Outcomes - Conversion of Zones:

· Throughout this Plan, any reference to a zone in Orange LEP 2000 is to be taken to be a reference to the corresponding zone(s) in the zone conversion table.

The corresponding zone to zone 3(a) Regional Centre (Orange LEP 2000) is zone B3 Commercial Core (Orange LEP 2011). As such, Orange DCP 2004 – Part 8 is relevant to this proposal. The provisions of Part 8 are considered below.

Chapter 8 - Development in Business Zones

Design and Character

Part 8 of the DCP stems from the recommendations of the Structure Plan developed by consultants Dickson Rothschild in 2002/2003. The CBD Plan identified the following main issues:

· appropriate land uses

· building type and form, setbacks

· building facades and awning treatments

· regard for heritage values

· lack of active street frontages and unused entrances

· landscape and public domain features

· signage

· dilapidated or unused buildings.

The CBD Plan found that dominance of shopping centres and driveways to public and private parking areas can reduce streetscape qualities of CBD streets, which reduces pedestrian amenity. Blank walls and unused shop entrances reduce pedestrian amenity along important pedestrian-pathways frontages.

There is a need to create unifying elements along street facades and to integrate heritage features with new buildings.

Central Business District - Design Requirements

The subject property is located on the periphery of the Central Business District (CBD). Part 8.1-1 of the DCP requires that buildings within the CBD have a high level of urban design to contribute to the regional status of the CBD as a regional hub, with attention given to façade features, external materials, colour and advertising.

It is considered that architecturally the proposed development is compatible with its surroundings. It is noted that buildings in the vicinity incorporate a diverse range of styles and finishes. There are significant heritage buildings on the opposite side of Peisley Street (ie on the street’s western side). There is a significant heritage precinct to the south in Summer Street and, somewhat further, in the rail activity related buildings. There are buildings within the civic precinct that possess a high degree of community importance; whilst not precisely of heritage importance, these buildings are significant from the perspective of the civic values of the community.

There are also buildings and sites of contemporary design with little or no heritage cultural or visual appeal. These include the plumbing outlet opposite as well as the Jax Tyres building and the carwash located to the south.

Chapter 14 - Advertising

Reference:	DA 417/2017(2)	Determination Date	31 August 2018
PR Number	PR27610
Applicant/s:	AMP Pastoral Pty Limited
Owner/s:	AMP Pastoral Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 100 DP 1226302 – Kite Street, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent – hotel or motel accommodation (alterations and additions). The modification involves conversion of first floor accommodation to provide seven motel rooms with ensuites; five motel rooms; two new kitchenettes and one new bathroom.
Value:	$215,000 (being $15,000 more than the original development)

Reference:	DA 449/2017(2)	Determination Date	17 September 2018
PR Number	PR
Applicant/s:	Mr CH and Mrs MJ Boardman
Owner/s:	Mr CH and Mrs MJ Boardman
Location:	Lot 98 DP 1180866 – 26 Colliers Avenue, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent – vehicle body repair workshop. The modified proposal will amend the external wall claddings of the approved vehicle repair station, transport depot and vehicle sales or hire premises.
Value:	$860,000 (being the same value as the original development)

Reference:	DA 42/2018(2)	Determination Date	27 August 2018
PR Number	18292
Applicant/s:	Stimson and Baker Planning
Owner/s:	Aldi Foods Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 500 DP 1033145 – 167-177 Peisley Street, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - shop (alterations and additions to existing building). The modification involves minor alterations to the approved car park layout.
Value:	$1,364,000 (being the same value as the original development)

Reference:	DA 3/2018(1)	Determination Date	12 September 2018
PR Number	PR23353
Applicant/s:	Hardware Property TC Pty Limited
Owner/s:	Hardware Property TC Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 100 DP 1137137 – 253 McLachlan Street, Orange (Mitre 10)
Proposal:	Hardware and building supplies (alterations and additions), business identification signage and demolition
Value:	$700,000

Reference:	DA 181/2018(1)	Determination Date	10 September 2018
PR Number	PR25972
Applicant/s:	Fautari Properties Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Fautari Properties Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 100 DP 1180866 – 2 Trappit Place, Orange
Proposal:	Freight transport facility (new industrial building)
Value:	$525,500

Reference:	DA 218/2018(1)	Determination Date	3 September 2018
PR Number	PR18416
Applicant/s:	Mr MK Tufail
Owner/s:	Regional NSW Islamic Centre Inc
Location:	Lot 51 DP 1066967 – 344A Peisley Street, Orange
Proposal:	Place of public worship (alterations and additions to existing buildings)
Value:	$40,000

Reference:	DA 219/2018(1)	Determination Date	29 August 2018
PR Number	PR6028
Applicant/s:	Mr CA and Mrs SL Jacques
Owner/s:	Mr CA and Mrs SL Jacques
Location:	Lot 1 DP 998736 – 1 Kenna Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (two lot residential), demolition (existing garage), carport (new construction), subdivision (three lot residential) and dwellings (three – new construction)
Value:	$590,000

Reference:	DA 229/2018(1)	Determination Date	27 August 2018
PR Number	PR12664
Applicant/s:	Mr N Gee, Mrs DV Gee and Ms A Mitchell
Owner/s:	Mr NC Gee, Mrs DV Gee and Ms AL Mitchell
Location:	Lot 1 DP 714681 – 8 William Street, Orange
Proposal:	Medical centre (change of use from residential accommodation) and business identification signage
Value:	$80,000

Reference:	DA 241/2018(1)	Determination Date	31 August 2018
PR Number	PR26011
Applicant/s:	Mr K and Mrs SB Barber
Owner/s:	Mrs SB Barber
Location:	Lot 640 DP 1172022 – 17 Bowman Avenue, Orange
Proposal:	Dual occupancy (one additional detached dwelling) and subdivision (two lot residential)
Value:	$340,000

Reference:	DA 246/2018(1)	Determination Date	18 September 2018
PR Number	PR23045
Applicant/s:	Orange District Softball Association
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Lot 1 DP 1142713 – Sir Jack Brabham Park – 1610 Forest Road, Orange
Proposal:	Recreation facility (outdoor)(ancillary building additions)
Value:	$9,500

Reference:	DA 249/2018(1)	Determination Date	27 August 2018
PR Number	PR26604
Applicant/s:	Gregory J Coleman Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Ms GL Bristowe
Location:	Lot 27 DP 1200262 – 2 The Snowy Way, Orange
Proposal:	Exhibition home and business identification signage
Value:	$330,000

Reference:	DA 254/2018(1)	Determination Date	12 September 2018
PR Number	PR28037
Applicant/s:	Mr DL Jones
Owner/s:	Mr DL Jones
Location:	Lot 205 DP 1244057 – 50 Catania Street, Orange
Proposal:	Dual occupancy and subdivision (two lot residential)
Value:	$450,000

Reference:	DA 264/2018(1)	Determination Date	28 August 2018
PR Number	PR3537
Applicant/s:	Roberts Family Superannuation
Owner/s:	Premium Custody Services Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 1 DP 150494 – 1 Dora Street, Orange
Proposal:	Demolition (tree removal)
Value:	$1,000

Reference:	DA 271/2018(1)	Determination Date	31 August 2018
PR Number	PR19014
Applicant/s:	McKinnon Design
Owner/s:	Mr JH and Mrs HJ Ovenden
Location:	Lot 44 DP 1063083 – 9 Elwin Drive, Orange
Proposal:	General industry and warehouse (new industrial building)
Value:	$650,000

Reference:	DA 300/2018(1)	Determination Date	12 September 2018
PR Number	PR26930
Applicant/s:	Saunders Global
Owner/s:	BMPS 88 Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 1 DP 1181850 – 54 Hill Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (two lot Torrens)
Value:	$0

Application lodged	6 September 2018
Applicant/s	Mr SI Munro
Owner/s	Mr SI Munro and Mrs V McCourt-Munro
Land description	Approved Lot 4 in a subdivision of Lot 7 DP 286647 – 51 Moulder Street, Orange (formerly known as Lot 1 DP 797835 and Lot 201 DP 1175177 - 49 and 51 Moulder Street, Orange
Proposed land use	Dwelling House, Community Title Subdivision (three lot residential), Community Title Subdivision (four lot residential) and Dwelling Houses (four)
Value of proposed development	$260,000

Application lodged	4 September 2018
Applicant/s	Orange City Council
Owner/s	Orange City Council
Land description	Lots 1 and 2 Section 4 DP 758817 – 84 Dalton Street and Lot 1 Anson Street, Orange
Proposed land use	Subdivision (three lot Torrens)
Value of proposed development	Not applicable

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned B4 Mixed Use, R3 Medium Density Development and RE1 Public Recreation
Lot Size Map:	No minimum lot size
Heritage Map:	A Local heritage item or adjacent to heritage conservation area
Height of Buildings Map:	Building height limits 16m, 25m, 26m and 22m
Floor Space Ratio Map:	Floor space limit 1.8
Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:	No biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater vulnerable
Drinking Water Catchment Map:	Not within the drinking water catchment
Watercourse Map:	Not within or affecting a defined watercourse
Urban Release Area Map:	Not within an urban release area
Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area